


















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































. 

I- 
















































■ 


































































63 °s« C S«sSo» SS } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES j D No D 25S NT 


Reports on Examination and Survey 
of Etowah, Coosa, Tallapoosa 
and Alabama Rivers 

(GEORGIA AND ALABAMA) 


LETTER FROM 
THE SECRETARY OF WAR 

TRANSMITTING 

WITH A LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, 
REPORTS ON EXAMINATION AND SURVEY OF 
ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND 
ALABAMA RIVERS, GEORGIA 
AND ALABAMA 




October 16, 1913.—Referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors 
and ordered to be printed, with illustrations 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1914 











D. 

JAM 


V • , . 

'-t :• 

.... „ h 



TC 4-^4 

.Or 4 ^ 
i V) 4 

^ •- 



OF D, 

2C 1914 




. ■ 


* v 

♦ < i 


/ 


\ 


C ' ' 







63 d Congress, ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. J Document 
1st Session. j (No. 253. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS, 

GA. AND ALA. 


LETTER 

FROM 

THE SECRETARY OF WAR, 

TRANSMITTING, 

WITH A LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, REPORTS ON 
EXAMINATION AND SURVEY OF ETOWAH, COOSA, AND TALLA¬ 
POOSA. RIVERS, GA. AND ALA., WITH A VIEW TO THEIR IMPROVE¬ 
MENT FOR NAVIGATION, INCLUDING THE ALABAMA RIVER IN 
ONNECTION THEREWITH, AND INVESTIGATIONS NECESSARY 
O DETERMINE WHETHER STORAGE RESERVOIRS AT THE HEAD¬ 
WATERS OF SAID RIVERS CAN BE UTILIZED TO ADVANTAGE 
ND WHAT PORTION OF THE COST OF ANY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS, 
CLUDING RESERVOIRS, SHOULD BE BORNE BY OWNERS OF 
WATER POWER AND OTHERS. 


October 16, 1913.—Referred to tlie Committee on Rivers and Harbors and ordered 

to be printed, with illustrations. 


War Department, 
Washington, October 11, 1913 . 
The Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Sir : I have the honor to transmit herewith a letter from the Chief 
of Engineers, United States Army, dated 9th instant, together with 
copies of reports from Capt. (now Maj.) H. B. Ferguson, Corps of 
Engineers, dated June 1, 1909, and June 10, 1910, with maps and 
appendixes, on preliminary examination and survey, respectively, of 
Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, Ga. and Ala., made by him 
in compliance with the provisions of the river and harbor act approved 
March 3, 1909. 

Very respectfully, Bindley M. Garrison, 

Secretary of War. 








2 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


War Department, 

r Office of the Chief of Engineers, 

Washington, October 9, 1913. 

From: The Chief of Engineers, United States Army. 

To: The Secretary of War. 

Subject: Preliminary examination and survey of Etowah, Coosa, 

Tallapoosa and Alabama Rivers, Ga. and Ala. 

1. There are submitted herewith, for transmission to Congress, 
reports dated June 1, 1909, and June 10, 1910, with maps and appen¬ 
dixes, by Capt. (now Maj.) H. B. Ferguson, Corps of Engineers, on 
preliminary examination and survey, respectively, made pursuant to 
the following item contained in the river and harbor act approved 
March 3, 1909: 

Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, with a view to their improvement for navi¬ 
gation. Such examination for the improvement of the navigation of said rivers, 
including the Alabama River in connection therewith, shall include investigations 
necessary to determine whether storage reservoirs at the headwaters of said rivers can 
be utilized to advantage, and if so. what portion of the cost of any such improvements, 
including reservoirs, should be borne by owners of water power and others. 

2. Projects now in force provide for securing a 4-foot navigation 
on the Coosa River from Rome, Ga., to Lock 4, Ala., and for improv¬ 
ing the Alabama River from its mouth to Montgomer}^ by dredging 
and works of regulation. No work has ever been done on the Etowah 
River, and in recent years no work has been done on the Tallapoosa 
River. The plan of improvement now proposed by the district offi¬ 
cer is for locks and dams on the Coosa, for storage reservoirs at the 
headwaters of the Coosa and the Tallapoosa, and for regulation on 
the Alabama. He recommends for the present the adoption of the 
plan set forth in Table U E" of his report (p. 50), which plan provides 
for 14 dams on the Coosa between Gadsden and Wetumpka and for 
the Etowah reservoir. Under this plan it is expected to secure a 
navigable depth of 4 feet on the Coosa from Rome to Gadsden, 6 feet 
from Gadsden to the Tallapoosa, and 6 feet in the Alabama from the 
Tallapoosa to the mouth of the river. The expenditure required on 
the part of the United States is estimated at $15,003,000 and the 
combined power and navigation improvement at $24,537,000. The 
district officer expresses the opinion that the locality is worthy of 
improvement by the United States in cooperation with power inter¬ 
ests to the extent above indicated under certain conditions respecting 
the establishment of terminal facilities at important points. The 
division engineer concurs in general with the views of the district 
officer. 

3. Subsequent to the above report efforts were made by the district 
officer to secure from interested power companies a definite offer of 
cooperation. In his letter of January 9, 1913, forwarding a commu¬ 
nication dated January 3, 1913, he states that there is no present 
prospect of securing such cooperation. 

4. These reports have been referred, as required by law, to the 
Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and attention is invited 
to its accompanying report of July 30, 1913. While recognizing the 
advantages of navigation on these streams and the value of water 
power in connection therewith in the development of commerce and 
the advisability of coordinating these interests when practicable at 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


3 


reasonable cost, the board does not believe that the probable benefits 
to general commerce and navigation woidd be sufficient to justify the 
expenditure of $15,000,000 on the part of the United States, even if 
private parties should undertake the power development on the terms 
proposed by the district officer. Neither does the board believe that 
the rental income from a combined development costing $24,537,000 
would so reduce the cost to the United States of the improvement for 
navigation as to render the undertaking advisable at the present time. 

5. After due consideration of the above-mentioned reports, I concur 
in general with the views of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and 
Harbors, and therefore, in carrying out the instructions of Congress, 
I report that the improvement by the United States of Etowah, 
Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, in the manner described in the reports 
herewith, is not deemed advisable at the present time. 

Wm. T. Rossell, 

Chief of Engineers, United States Army. 


REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS 

ON SURVEY. 

[Second indorsement.] 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, 

July 30, 1913. 

To the Chief of Engineers, United States Army: 

1. The board has given consideration to the report of the district 
officer on a survey of the Etowah, Coosa, Tallapoosa, and Alabama 
Rivers, made in compliance with the act of March 3, 1909, and lias 
the honor to submit its views thereon. The item of law calling for 
this investigation has in view the improvement of the navigation of 
said rivers and a determination of whether storage reservoirs at the 
headwaters can be utilized to advantage; and if so, what portion of 
the cost of improvement, including reservoirs, should be borne by 
owners of watcrpowers and others. 

2. Surveys were made of one reservoir site on the Etowah, one on 
the Conasauga, and two on the Tallapoosa River; also of various 
lock and dam sites on the Coosa River. The Etowah and Oostanaula 
Rivers form the Coosa and the Coosa and the Tallapoosa Rivers form 
the Alabama. The Coosa is now navigable from Rome, Ga., to Lock 
No. 4, Ala., 182 miles. From Lock No. 4 to Wetumpka, 116 miles, it 
is not navigable; from Wetumpka to the Gulf, 323 miles, the Coosa 
11 miles, and the Alabama, 312 miles, are navigable. The project 
depth for the Coosa, Rome to Lock No. 4, is 4 feet, and the same for 
the Alabama. The Etowah and the Tallapoosa are not under 
improvement. 

3. The plan of improvement proposed by the district officer for 
locks and dams on the Coosa, lor storage reservoirs on the head¬ 
waters of the Coosa and the Tallapoosa, and for regulation on the 
Alabama. Under the head of reservoirs the district officer pre¬ 
sents data bearing upon available storage, reservoir capacity and 
cost, effective storage, effect on navigation and effect on waterpower. 
He proposes a site for a reservoir on the Etowah River at a point 
about 3 miles east of Cartersville, Ga. It is estimated that the 



4 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

average yearly run-off amounts to 69,000,000,000 cubic feet. The 
reservoir capacity, with a dam 174 feet high, is given as 42,000,000,000 
cubic feet, or about 60 per cent of the mean annual supply. The 
estimated cost of the reservoir is $4,000,000, including cost of dam 
construction and all incidental cost of flowage. The effective 
storage, or the amount that will actually be available for power and 
navigation in excess of the natural low-water flow, is 37.7 billion 
cubic feet. With regard to the effect on navigation, the district 
officer estimates that on the upper Coosa a low-water flow of 800 
second-feet would, with 30,000,000,000 cubic feet effective storage, 
be increased to 3,600 second-feet, which with regulation would, in 
connection with the lock and dam at Horse Leg Shoal, already pro¬ 
vided for, give 4 to 6 foot navigation between Rome and Lock No. 1, 
depending upon the amount of channel improvement. On the 
Alabama at Montgomery, a low-water flow of about 2,100 second- 
feet, supplemented by an effective storage of 36.8 billion feet, would 
become 6,600 second-feet, and a flow of 3,300 second-feet at Selma 
would be increased to 7,700 second-feet. This should raise the Mont¬ 
gomery gauge height from —1.9 to +0.8, a difference of 2.7 feet. 
The present project for the Alabama is for a 4-foot navigable depth 
at zero of gauge. Without increased flow this depth can be secured 
only by very extensive regulation, while with 6,600 second-feet the 
district officer estimates that 4 feet could be secured with moderate 
regulation and 4.8 feet with the work contemplated under the exist¬ 
ing project estimated to cost $500,000. The effect on waterpower is 
discussed at some length by the district officer. He selects for the 
purpose of estimate 6 sites on the Coosa where it is believed power 
can be profitably developed at this time. At these sites he esti¬ 
mated the 1904 low-water flow at from 1,063 second-feet to 1,432 
second-feet. It is expected that the effect of storage from the sev¬ 
eral dams and from the Etowah Reservoir will increase the flow to 
amounts varying from 3,970 second-feet to 5,120 second-feet. The 
head at the several dams is given at from 26 feet to 63 feet, which 
the district officer estimates will, with the local and Etowah storage, 
result in a total of 222-, 185 10-hour horsepower delivered. The in¬ 
crease in primary power on account of Etowah storage is given as 
98,354 secondary horsepower made primary, and an additional 
primary power of 25,477, or a total of 123,831 horsepower. 

4. The district officer presents data for a reservoir on the Cona- 
sauga River similar to those given for the Etowah Reservoir, but 
on account of the lack of definite gaging information the estimates 
are approximate only, and no work is recommended at this place for 
the present. 

5. Data covering two reservoirs on the Tallapoosa are given in 
detail, including estimates of cost and plan of cooperation by the 
United States and water-power interests. As one of these reservoirs 
would be capable of storing the available supply of water, the dis¬ 
trict officer recommends that consideration be given to that one 
only, and in view of the fact that no definite plan of cooperation ha 3 
been entered into between the United States and the power interests 
owning this site the district officer does not recommend any expendi¬ 
tures on the part of the United States at this time. 

6. He recommends for the present the adoption of the plan set 
forth in Table E of his report, which plan provides for 14 dams on 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


5 


the Coosa between Gadsden and Wetumpka and for the Etowah 
Reservoir. The amount of expenditure required on the parfr of the 
United States is as follows: 

For 8 low dams and all locks on the Coosa River, 10 single locks and 4 


flights of 2 locks. $0, 990, 000 

For navigation share of 6 high dams. 4, 013, 000 

For Etowah reservoir. 4, 000, 000 


Total 


15, 003, 000 


Total estimate for combined power and navigation improvement is $24,537,000. 
The estimate for maintenance and operation is as follows: 


Etowah Reservoir. $10,000 

Regulation maintenance, upper river. 20, 000 

10 sinurle locks and dams, at $5,000... 50, 000 

4 flights of 2 locks, at $6,000. 24, 000 

Regulation maintenance, Alabama River. 100, 000 


Total annual maintenance. 204, 000 

It is expected under this plan to secure a navigable depth of 4 feet 
in the Coosa from Rome to Gadsden, 6 feet from Gadsden to the 
Tallapoosa, and 6 feet in the Alabama from the Tallapoosa to the 
mouth of the river. The district officer expresses the opinion that 
the locality is worthy of improvement to the extent above recom¬ 
mended, and, further, that the money appropriated should be made 
available only when public wharves, warehouses, and freight-han¬ 
dling facilities and steam and electric railway connections therewith, 
as may be approved by the Secretary of War, shall have been con¬ 
structed, or bond equal to their estimated cost shall have been given 
for such construction, at Selma, Wetumpka, Riverside, Ragland, 
Gadsden, Ala., and Rome, Ga. He further states that reservoir 
sites of this type are rare, and that the construction of this reservoir 
is a part of the most advantageous plan for the development of this 
river system, and he recommends that in the interests of economy, 
without reference to the time of construction, provision be made for 
the acquisition of this site as soon as possible. Subject to certain 
comments as to determination of water-rental values, the division 
engineer concurs in the views of the district officer. 

7. With regard to the rental to be paid by water-power interests, 
the district officer states that the rental to be specified in the con¬ 
tract on the power developed from the natural flow of the river 
should finally be equivalent to interest at commercial rates on the 
expenditure saved by power companies due to the Government ex¬ 
penditure on the dams in the Coosa River. Rental should for a rea¬ 
sonable time be based on power sold, as only such power has an 
actual value. If the Government expenditure at each dam is the 
amount given in Table E, Column IV, as chargeable to navigation, 
and 6 per cent is assumed as proper commercial interest, the final 
rental per year of horsepower for primary power obtained (as given 
in Table C, Column I) would be as follows: 

Lock No. 2, $1.60; Lock No. 6, $3.05; Lock No. 10, $2.72; Lock 
No. 11, $2.47; Lock No. 12, $2; Lock No. 13, $2.50. A rental of $1 
per year for the first five years, and between $1 and the final rental 
for the next five years is considered equitable. For the increased 
power due to the Etowah Reservoir, he recommends that each com- 














G ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

pany at a power dam on the lower river be granted the right to 
utilize the power due to the increased flow created by the reservoir 
and pay therefor a charge on the basis of $1 per year for the first 
five years, $2 per year for the next five years, $3 per year for the fol¬ 
lowing 10 years on all 10-hour horsepower sold in excess of the amount 
due to the minimum natural flow of the river, the actual amount of 
this excess power to be determined by the Secretary of War, and that 
after 20 years the charge be S3 on all excess power obtainable. 

8. The commerce of the Alabama River for 1909 as given in the 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for fiscal year ending June 30, 1910, 
was 85,350 tons, valued at $6,043,140, the most important items being 
cotton 11,061 tons, value $2,654,700; merchandise 13,994 tons, value 
$1,609,778; fertilizer 16,946 tons, value $398,231; naval stores 3,509 
tons, value $248,000. The commerce given for the Coosa River for 
the same year is 119,072 tons, valued at $827,204, the principal items 
of which are sand 55,000 tons, value $50,000; logs 58,000 tons, value 
$38,600; cotton 1,056 tons, value $253,440. It is estimated that with 
an improved river the amount of commerce would be greatly in¬ 
creased, as the country tributary is rapidly developing and there is a 
large potential commerce in iron ore, coal, marble, clay products, 
cement, and other commodities not yet fully developed. 

9. At the request of interested parties a hearing was given at the 
office of the board on October 26, 1911, which was attended by Capt. 
W. P. Lay; Hon. F. D. Kohn; Capt. J. M. Elliot; Hon. J. L. Burnett, 
M. C.; Hon. G. Lee, M. C.; and Hon. G. W. Taylor, M. C., all of whom 
addressed the board in favor of the improvement of the river. 

10. The question of water-power development for commercial 
purposes by private capital alone or in cooperation with the General 
Government in the interests of navigation is one of growing impor¬ 
tance, and it may be that when the proper time arrives some satis¬ 
factory arrangement can be made by which the greater part of the 
cost of the improvement under consideration will be borne by private 
interests, while the Federal Government retains general control of 
the stream and the power developed upon it. As indicated by the 
accompanying letter from the district officer, dated January 9, 1913, 
and the letter from the Alabama Power Co., dated January 3, 1913, 
there is no present prospect of such cooperation. Under exist¬ 
ing conditions, therefore, it is considered premature for the Govern¬ 
ment to take steps looking toward power development on these rivers, 
as outlined by the district officer. 

11. While recognizing the advantages of navigation on these 
streams and the value of water power in connection therewith in the 
development of commerce, and the advisability of coordinating these 
interests when practicable at reasonable cost, the board does not 
believe that the probable benefits to general commerce and naviga¬ 
tion likely to result from the improvement under consideration 
would be sufficient to justify the expenditure of $15,000,000 on the 
part of the United States, even if private parties should undertake 
the power-development portion of the project on the terms proposed 
by the district officer. Neither does the board believe that the 
rental income from a combined development costing $24,537,000 
would so reduce the cost to the United States of the improvement for 
navigation as to render the undertaking advisable at the present time. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 7 

* , 

12. With reference to the subject of terminal and transfer facilities 
it appears from Table F of the report of the district officer that the 
several important localities to be affected by the improvement are 
prepared to construct wharves and suitable terminal facilities. The 
subject of water power is fully treated by the district officer, and he 
states in reference to floods that the effect of the Etowah reservoirs 
would probably reduce the floods at Rome by about 50 per cent 
and the Tallapoosa Reservoir should reduce the floods at Montgomery 
about 12 per cent. In compliance with law, the board reports that 
none of these questions are so related to the proposed work as to 
render it advisable at this time in the interests of navigation. 

For the board: 

W. M. Black, 

Colonel , Corps of Engineers, 

Senior Member of the Board. 


PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND 

ALABAMA RIVERS, GA. AND ALA. 

War Department, 

United States Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala., June 1, 1909. 

Sir: 1. I have the honor to submit the following report on pre¬ 
liminary examination of the Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers: 

2. The river and harbor act, approved March 3, 1909, provides for 
examination of— 

Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, with a view to their improvement for navi¬ 
gation. Such examination for the improvement of the navigation of said rivers, 
including the Alabama River in connection therewith, shall include investigations 
necessary to determine whether storage reservoirs at the headwaters of said rivers can 
be utilized to advantage, and, if so, what portion of the cost of any such improve¬ 
ments, including reservoirs, should be borne by owners of water power and others. 

3. The approved projects under which work is now being done 
provide for securing 4-foot navigation on the Coosa River from Rome, 
Ga., to Lock 4, Ala., and for improving the Alabama River from its 
mouth to Montgomery by dredging and works of regulation, which 
improvement it is hoped will give 6-foot navigation for nine months 
during the year. Reference is made to Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1908, pages 387-391, for summary of previous projects 
and improvements. 

No work has ever been done on the Etowah River; a survey was 
made of this river in 1879, report being unfavorable because of lack 
of population and of development of mineral resources. 

During recent years no work has been done on the Tallapoosa 
River; work that was at one time done consisted in snagging opera¬ 
tions near the mouth of the river. 

A comprehensive report on the improvement of the Alabama and 
Coosa Rivers was submitted by Capt. (now Maj.) Cavanaugh on June 
30, 1904. This report is printed in House Document No. 219, Fifty- 
eighth Congress, third session, and in Annual Report of the Chief of En¬ 
gineers for 1905, page 1351, et. seq. Reference is made to this report 
for general description of the Alabama River, project for improvement 



8 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


of both rivers, discussion of freight rates, and cost of water haul from 
the Coosa Valley to Mobile, information concerning the resources of 
the valley at that date, and prospective commerce with the rivers 
improved. 

4. The present river and harbor act requires consideration of 
storage reservoirs, coordination of water power and navigation, and 
the revision of commercial data. 


STORAGE RESERVOIRS. 

5. The question of storage reservoirs will be discussed under the 
heads of— 

(a) Benefits to navigation; 

(b) Benefits to water power; and 

(c) Reservoir sites. 

(a) Benefits to navigation—The length of the river to be affected 
by storage is 526 miles, being the Coosa from Rome, Ga., to Lock 1, 
from Wetumpka, Ala., to the mouth of the Tallapoosa River, and the 
Alabama River. The affected section of the upper Coosa would be 
shortened by a lock at Horseleg Shoals and a high dam at Lock 2. 
Only the lower Coosa and the Alabama will be considered in detail. 

The following discussion is based on an assumed discharge of 6,000 
second-feet at Montgomery: 

The Alabama River has comparatively stable banks. It has no 
lower tributary which has a low-water flowage of importance. The 
lowest low-water discharge at Selma (1904) was 3,300 second-feet, 
and at Montgomery 2,150 second-feet. The relative effects of storage 
will decrease as you go downstream. The present relative needs of 
navigation also decrease downstream. 

The effect of a certain discharge on the river gauges is as follows: 



Discharge— 


Discharge— 

Gauge. 

At Mont¬ 
gomery. 

At Selma. 

Gauge. 

At Mont¬ 
gomery. 

At Selma. 

Feet. 

Second-feet. 

Second-feet. 

Feet. 

Second-feet. 

Second-feet, j 

-1.9 


3,150 

0.2 

4,650 

6,440 

-1.8 

2,150 

2,275 

3,300 

.4 

5,000 

6,780 

-1.6 

3,600 

.6 

5,375 

7,120 

-1.4 

2,450 

3,900 

.8 

5,775 

7,460 

-1.2 

2,625 

4,200 

1.0 

6,225 

7,800 

-1.0 

2,850 

4,500 

1.2 

6,650 

8,160 

- .8 

3,100 

4,820 

1.4 

7,100 

8,520 

- .6 

3,400 

5,140 

1.6 

7,550 

8,880 

- .4 

3,700 

5,460 

1.8 

8,050 

9,240 

- .2 
.0 

4,000 

4,325 

5,780 

6,100 

2.0 

, 

8,550 

9,660 


These gauges are in pools below the middle of the pools. From 
observations made last year it was found that an increased flowage 
gave practically the same increase of depth on bars and at these gauges 
as seen in Table 2. This conclusion corresponds to the practice of 
the pilots, who figure that a foot more on a gauge (in a pool) gives a 
foot more on the bars. These gauges were placed so that zero on the 
gauges gave 3 feet on the bars. This relation was verified last fall 
while trying to bring to Montgomery a dredge drawing 3 feet 2 inches 




























ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 9 

while the river fluctuated a few tenths from the Montgomery gauge 
zero. 

From the above it is seen that 6,000 second-feet minimum flowage 
will increase the navigable depth 2.8 feet (from —1.8 to +1) above 
low water of 1904, and will give 4.8 feet over bars, or 4-foot navigation, 
without further regulation. With regulation, this depth can be 
increased. The theoretical possibilities with regulation, computed 
by Mr. D. M. Andrews, assistant engineer, using constants closely 
approximated for this river, are given in Table 2. The approach to 
these possibilities is limited only by excessive cost of regulation. 
With 6,000 second-feet low flowage it is considered practicable to 
obtain 6-foot navigation all the year with reasonable expenditures; 
that is, with such regulation as will give 6-foot navigation for nine 
months under present conditions. In 1904 the flowage was less than 
6,000 second-feet for more than three months. The maximum 
feasible regulation will give 8-foot navigation. 

The next question is: How much water is required to maintain a 
minimum of 6,000 second-feet at Montgomery? The gauge readings 
here are complete from 1890 to date. The lowest and longest dura¬ 
tion of low water of record was 1904, the year 1903 being one of fairly 
high water. The next w r orst year was 1897, the previous year being 
also low. Therefore, 1904 and 1897 are taken as the critical years 
during a period of 19 years of gauge record. Incidential office records 
back to 1876 mention no such extreme low-water periods. However, 
semiofficial records of the Alabama Historical Department mention 
1840 as an extreme low-water year, when navigation stopped on the 
Alabama River (about 1-foot draft) and fish died in the Warrior 
River. The year 1839 was also an extremely dry year. 

Below is given the computed flowage at Etowah Reservoir site and 
shortage at Montgomery for these critical periods. The available 
flowage w r as obtained by deducting the total low-water flowage and 
an assumed flowage of 600 second-feet (exact amount to be fixed 
later) for high-water months, and its relation to shortage below 6,000 
second-feet at Montgomery is as follows, in billion cubic feet: 



1895 

1896 

1897 

1903 

1904 

Available flowage of Etowah River at reservoir site. 

48 

24 

30 

25 

70 

9 

Shortage of Alabama River at Montgomery below 6,000 second- 

6 

18 

5 

32 








Allowing 60 inches per year for evaporation on reservoir, the avail¬ 
able storage wall be sufficient to maintain 6,000 second-feet at Mont¬ 
gomery with a margin of about 50 per cent for losses, due to unavoid¬ 
able errors of control and for losses en route. Further investigation 
is necessary to determine these losses en route. It may be found 
practicable to lessen errors of control by a 12-hour pondage at lower 
dam on Coosa River. 

Drawing 2, obtained from drawing 1, shows the amount (in billion 
cubic feet) of storage required to maintain the gauge at various 
heights. The abrupt curve, due in part to water being raised above 
narrow channel, show r s the necessity of combining regulation with 
storage. For example, the second 10,000,000,000 cubic feet of stor- 



















10 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

age without regulation will raise the gauge reading but 0.3 in 1904 
or 1897. Its effect with regulation is seen in Table 3. 

(b) Benefits to water power .—The great value of the water powers 
on the Coosa River has been long recognized. The original project, 
devised before development of hydroelectricity, was later disapproved 
by Maj. Judson because it destroyed the water power. Maj. Cava¬ 
naugh’s later project provides for higher dams, which will develop a 
large per cent of the horsepower. 

The main conflict between navigation and water-power interests 
would seem to be due to the fact that the proposed development for 
water power and the proposed improvement for navigation were not 
coincident as to time. Recently extensive investigations of Coosa 
River water powers have been made by various private interests. 
While, prior to complete survey and estimates, the proper ratio of 
cost and benefit can not be thoroughly discussed, a few outlines will 
be given as bearing upon the feasibility of possible cooperation. 
There can be developed on this river, with its natural flow, about 
40,000 (24 hours per day) horsepower. The benefits to water power 
from a storage reservoir will be in practically the direct ratio of the 
present low-water flow (about 1,500 second-feet) to the attained flow. 
Assuming this attained low-water flow at 6,000 second-feet at Mont¬ 
gomery, the value of the horsepower on the river will be multiplied 
by more than three, and, again, depending on the use to which these 
powers are to be put (car lines or factories), they can be doubled in 
whole or in part by providing, at a low-navigation dam, a 12-hour 
pondage below the last power dam or at some of the intermediate 
low dams. The value of these water powers is so great that if the 
entire rivers were turned over to private interests the reservoir dam 
and power dams would no doubt be speedily constructed. This, how¬ 
ever, would mean that one interest must control the whole river, 
which contingency is objectionable, and it seems that in general the 
line of cooperation should be that, owing to the large benefits to navi¬ 
gation, the General Government should own and control the storage 
reservoir dam and the lower regulating dam, which dams should be 
operated as navigation alone may require. The incidental benefits 
and disadvantages should receive prior monetary consideration. 

In addition to the water powers on the Coosa River, the water 
powers on the Etowah River will also become valuable. The slope 
of the river just above the reservoir dam is very great, therefore the 
lower 40 feet or more of the dam will provide no great amount of 
storage and can be used for power. This power, and also the power 
that can be developed on the Etowah River, will be great in summer 
and small in winter; that is, the almost exact complement of the 
water-power development on the Chattahoochee River, which devel¬ 
opment is within a radius of 40 miles, and could thus be benefited 
by storage, as can the Coosa River powers. The improvement of 
this river, in cooperation with water-power owners, is feasible, and 
will materially reduce the cost to be borne by the United States. 

( c ) Reservoir sites .—Examination has been made on the Etowah 
and Tallapoosa Rivers, also on the Conasauga and Coosawattee 
Rivers, which rivers form the Oostanaula, which unites with the 
Etowah at Rome, forming the Coosa. Three sites considered worthy 
of further investigation were found. The Coosawattee River site 
above Carters, owing to steep slope of river above dam and high dam 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 11 

required, will not be further considered, but is included in table 
below. 

Below is given the characteristics of various sites. This table was 
prepared by Mr. D. M. Andrews, assistant engineer, with such data 
as are at hand, but so far as regards capacity of reservoir and flooded 
land, the estimates must be considered approximate only, though it 
is believed they are fairly conservative. 


RESERVOIRS. 


Estimated, flowage. 


River. 

Site. 

Drainage 

area. 

Flowage (billion cubic feet). 

1895 

1896 

1897 

1903 

1904 

Conasauga. 

Coosawattee. 

Etowah. 

Tallapoosa. 

Below Jack River. 

Above Carters, Ga. 

Cartersville, Ga. 

Below Little Tallapoosa... 

Sq. miles. 
85 
441 
1.023 
1,436 

6.0 

35.0 

72.0 

63.3 

4.1 

23.9 

49.1 

61.6 

5.0 

29.1 
67.8 

65.1 

8.5 

41.8 

92.5 

153.0 

4.0 

17.9 

33.5 

60.0 


Estimated capacities. 


River. 

Dam site. 

Height 
of dam. 

Area. 

Capacity. 

Conasauga. 

Below Jack River. 

Feet. 

) 50 

\ 100 

100 

\ 150 

175 

( 160 

{ 180 

200 

1 100 

\ 150 

Square 
miles. 
2.5 
5.0 
2.1 
4.0 
6.0 
30.0 
38.0 
85. 0 
38.0 
76.0 

Million 
cubic feet. 

3.48 
8. 71 
3.25 
9.20 
16.10 
28.00 
63.00 
90.00 
52. 94 
132.35 

Coosawattee. 

Above Carters, Ga. 

Etowah.. 

Cartersville, Ga. 

Tallapoosa. 

Below Little Tallapoosa. 


Etowah River .—On the Etowah River, just below the mouth of 
Allatoona Creek, about 3 miles east of Cartersville, Ga., is a proposed 
reservoir site. The river here is about 300 feet wide. The bottom 
and banks are granite. One bank rises about 1 on 1, the other 
1 on 2. The hill on either bank is several hundred feet high, 
there being beyond each hill a saddle depression (estimated eleva¬ 
tion 160 and 195, respectively). One of these could be made to 
serve as a spillway. This dam site was inspected by Mr. D. M. An¬ 
drews, assistant engineer, and myself, and is all that could be desired 
for a dam of any height up to 200 feet. The land that would be sub¬ 
merged does not seem to be especially valuable. A considerable 
portion of the land near the dam site is now lying out, reported as 
being part of an old estate, long encumbered and neglected. It is 
estimated that of the land flooded by a 200-foot dam at this place 
about three-fourths of it is either wooded or in a very low state of 
cultivation. The remaining one-fourth contains some valuable 
farming land. It was feared that a dam at this place might flood 
valuable mining property, but from the reports of the United States 

























































12 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEKS. 

Geological Survey and the Georgia Geological Survey it will be 
noticed that what is known as the Cartersville fault (map No. 2) 1 , 
dividing the Paleozoic from the Crystalline era, cuts off some 10 
counties of northwest Georgia and passes just west of Pine Mountain 
and below this dam site. This circumstance is considered particu¬ 
larly fortunate, leaving, as it does, the iron, manganese, ocher, and 
bauxite tributary to the river and providing the best possible founda¬ 
tion for a dam. The flooding of valuable farming lands is considered 
the only serious objection to a reservoir at this site, but it would be 
difficult at this date to find a site where apparently so little valuable 
land would be flooded. The question becomes one of cost, against 
which must be weighed resulting benefits. The computed run-off 
at this dam site is given above. From the information at hand—that 
is, United States Engineer profile of river to Little River, maps of the 
Geological Survey, and rough profiles and cross sections taken in the 
basin with barometer and hand level—it is estimated that a dam 
between 150 and 190 feet high will impound a large percentage of the 
available storage at this place. A survey of this site should include 
investigations as to silt, available flowage, flooded lands, and cost; 
also loss from reservoir to navigable river. 

Conasauga .—A reservoir site near the head of the Conasauga River 
was found. This site, as may be seen from photographs, 1 is practically 
ideal so far as dam and pond area are concerned. The flowage at this 
site has been estimated, and though it is not great, being only eight 
and one-half billion cubic feet for the year 1903, it is believed that for 
the storing of this amount of water this site may prove as economical 
as aify other. The effect that this amount of water would have is 
seen on drawings 2 and 3; that is, it would maintain the flowage at 
Montgomery at about 4,000 cubic feet per second. It would add to 
the discharge of the Oostenaula River, which item is worthy of consider¬ 
ation. It also adds to the value of powers on the Coosa River, and 
would more than double them. This site will need special investiga¬ 
tion as to silting, as well as to the flowage. 

Tallapoosa .—On the Tallapoosa River many places were found 
where high dams could be constructed, a most favorable place being 
below the mouth of the Little Tallapoosa. The estimated flow- 
age and capacity of the dam is given in tables above. This is con¬ 
sidered a very good site for a reservoir dam, but the increased flow- 
age due to such a dam will not add to the water powers on the Coosa. 
The expense without contribution from the water-power interests 
will make the cost excessive. There are now developed and in opera¬ 
tion two dams on the Tallapoosa River below this site. The favor¬ 
able conditions at this dam site warrant a survey sufficient to show 
the physical possibilities, to allow the preparation of a plan of coopera¬ 
tion, and to allow the purchase of the necessary lands before towns and 
railroads are located on same. It is to be noted, in this respect, that 
only valuable farming lands or mines flooded can be considered as 
actual loss, as the position of country towns and railroads is more or 
less accidental, their initial location being optional within a radius of 
several miles. A storage dam on this river will increase the flowage 
of the Tallapoosa River, which, no doubt, in course of time will be 
worthy of improvement. 


1 Not printed 






ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVEKS. 


13 


SILTING. 

6. The probable silting up of reservoirs has been considered. Aside 
from silting due to local erosion, which is easily preventable, the 
silting up of a reservoir will, in my opinion, depend largely on where 
it is located with reference to the river profile. In the mountains 
it has been observed that dams readily fill up; at one point, 6 miles 
from the mountain top, in virgin forest, it was noticed that a few logs 
thrown across a small stream valley had in a few floods accumulated 
silt to make a level lumber yard of several acres. Dam No. 2, on 
the Coosa River, was built in 1881 and has not silted up appreciably. 
This would seem to be explainable on general principles. Generally 
speaking, the erosion in the mountains is very great; the carrying 
capacity of streams is very great until a decided change of slope is 
reached, the carrying capacity varying at the sixth power of the 
velocity. “The stream bed is constantly trying to adjust itself to 
its base level, where there is neither cutting nor filling;” therefore 
a dam built within the zone of this adjusting slope will silt up more 
rapidly than a dam built farther away from the base of the mountain 
or this decided change of slope in the stream. Of the dam sites that 
have been examined, the Etowah and Tallapoosa sites are well away 
from this decided change of slope. On these rivers no danger from 
silting is anticipated. All dam sites would require very careful 
investigation in this respect. 

Aside from this silt that is transported along the bottom of a 
stream, a large reservoir will form a settling basin, and perhaps a 
great part of all the continuous sediment would be deposited. Dur¬ 
ing the last eight months attempts have been made to measure the 
silt in the Coosa River below Gadsden, and, though the river is in 
appearance very muddy, the sediment was found to be negligible. 
Mr. Andrews’s report gives details. 

PRESENT AND PROSPECTIVE COMMERCE. 

7. The commerce reported on the Coosa River between Rome, Ga., 
and Gadsden, Ala., for the year ending December 31, 1908, was 
$3,544,500. This length of river is 134 miles. It has two railroads 
on one side and one railroad on the other. During periods of extreme 
low water profitable navigation is impossible above Horseleg Shoals, 
for which place a lock and dam has recently been recommended. 

During the year 1908 the commerce on the Alabama River was 
about $9,000,000. During several past years the boat lines on this 
river ran only to Selma until last winter, since which time two boats 
each week have been running regularly to Montgomery with loads 
of from 150 to 200 tons. Grain from the West, coffee and sugar 
from New Orleans, dry goods from New York, and cotton downstream 
have been the chief items of commerce. 

The main changes in the commercial statistics of this section since 
Capt. (now Maj.) Cavanaugh’s report in 1904 are: 

First. Increase of about 38 per cent in value of taxable property. 

Second. Large increase in all manufacturing plants and their products. 

Third. More accurate and greatly increased estimates of total workable iron ore 
and coal. 

Fourth. Large increase in iron mined; also in lime and limestone output. 

Fifth. Initial development of marble industry. 

Sixth. Initial development of cement industry in Ragland district. 


14 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Statistics have been collected from 15 counties tributary to the 
Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia, and the following is a summary 
of these statistics: 


Summary of statistical data of the Coosa River valley , 15 counties, Alabama and Georgia. 


Population (1908). 

Increase in total tax valuation from 1904-1908 (five years).... per cent. 

Capital invested in manufacturing plants. 

•Products of manufacturing plants (1908): 

Quantity.tons. 

Amount. 

Capital invested in iron ore furnaces. 

Products of iron ore furnaces (normal): 

Quantity.tons. 

Amount. 

Capital invested in cotton mills (1908 ). 

Products of cotton mills: 

Quantity. tons. 

Amount. 

Cotton used in cotton mills.bales. 

Cotton raised in 1907. do... 

Value of grain crop (1907). 

Iron ore mined (normal).tons. 

Other ore mined (normal). do... 

Limestone and lime (normal). do... 

Marble quarried (1908).cubic feet. 

Coal mined (normal).tons. 

Value of mineral products (normal). 

Coal consumed (1908).tons. 

Coke consumed (1908).,. do... 

Timber cut (1908). 

Cement made (per year)....barrels. 

Bricks (fire, paving, and ordinary), yearly capacity of plants.tons. 

Fertilizer manufactured. do... 


380, 000 
38 

$35, 937, 000 

1, 280, 000 
$47, 865, 000 
$9, 354, 000 

900, 000 
$13, 500, 000 
$13, 813, 000 

51, 380 
$20, 014, 000 
224, 200 
178, 500 
$8, 625, 000 
1, 750, 000 
50, 000 
700, 000 
100, 000 
520, 000 
$5, 000, 000 
550, 000 
740, 000 
$1, 976, 000 
440, 000 
200, 000 
55, 600 


The above statistics were carefully collected. It is considered 
conservative to estimate that the present commerce to and from 
points in the valley exceeds $50,000,000 per year. 

While finished products do not seek the cheapest routes of trans- 
poration with the same persistence as do raw materials, it is believed 
that owing to the character , of the products of this valley, being 
heavier products, a fair percentage will be carried on the river. 

The prospects of commerce on the Coosa-Alabama Rivers are 
based on the natural resources of the Coosa River Valley, as well 
as on the present state of their development. These resources 
consist in iron and coal, marble, cement, limestone, and clay prod¬ 
ucts, timber, cotton, and other agricultural products. 

Iron and coal .—The total workable iron ore tributary to the Coosa 
is estimated at 300,000,000 tons, of which about 800,000 tons is 
used by furnaces and 1,750,000 tons is being mined annually. There 
is fluxing lime and coal near this iron ore. In short radius is found 
different classes of iron requisite for economic smelting. Attention 
is invited to the relative cost of assembling raw material for one ton 
of iron in England, at Pittsburgh, and at Gadsden. 

The total workable coal tributary to the Coosa is estimated at 
600,000,000 tons. While the chief use of this coal will be in the 
iron furnaces, cement works, and the preparation of clay products, 
there will remain some for export. A railroad has recently been 
constructed from the Blount Mountain fields to Gadsden. 




























ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


15 


Marble .—The marble deposit of Talladega Comity, Ala., outcrops 
near the Coosa River and extends for a distance of about 35 miles, 
being nowhere more than about 15 miles from the river. This 
deposit contains practically inexhaustible quantities of white mar¬ 
ble comparable to the Italian. It also contains three times this 
amount of blue marble. Further information concerning this marble 
is given in Appendix “D,” herewith. 

Cement , limestone , and clay products .—The close proximity of 
practically unlimited cement materials, coal, and the Coosa River 
has been known for many years as a geological coincidence, and 
makes a natural location for cement industries. A cement plant of 
600,000 barrels annual capacity is now being constructed at Ragland, 
Ala. 

The unlimited limestone deposits are now being extensively worked 
in the vicinity of Gadsden, the annual output being some 700,000 
tons. In addition to the use of this limestone for building pur¬ 
poses, a great deal of lime is now shipped to Louisiana for use in 
sugar factories and also as a fertilizer, and it is represented that with 
cheap river transportation the amount shipped for fertilizer would 
be very great, the saving in freight being enormous. 

The immense beds of valuable clay, including kaolin, pottery 
clay, and fire-brick clay, paving and common brick clays, are near 
coal. River transportation will increase the present not inconsid¬ 
erable output of this class of products by giving them a large radius 
of market at low rates. 

Cotton .—In the Coosa River valley there was produced last year 
178,000 bales of cotton. The cotton factories in this section used 
224,200 bales. In the counties on the Alabama River, below counties 
above considered, there was raised 190,000 bales of cotton. Raw cot¬ 
ton is worth about half as much as the coarsest kind of cotton yarn. 
It is reported that the United States last year imported cotton 
goods the value of which was twice the value of all the cotton exported. 
Surely this “economic crime” can not long continue. The inci¬ 
dental development of water power in connection with navigation 
will, in many instances, of which this is one, tend to build up traffic 
on the river. All the cotton near the Alabama River can, at a 
cheap rate, go to the cotton mills on the upper Coosa River, or, in 
fact, on the Alabama River, within the hydroelectric radius of the 
Coosa. The river will give this cotton a low rate for export as 
raw cotton, and also a low rate to any cotton mill. It also gives 
the cotton mills a low rate for the coarser cotton goods to Mobile 
en route to China. All of Alabama’s cotton manufactured into 
coarser yarn will mean an annual income of over $50,000,000. By 
manufacturing the higher grades of cotton cloth, the figures become 
fabulous. 

Minor items .—For details as to bauxite, ocher, and manganese ref¬ 
erence is made to Appendix B. 

There is manufactured in this valley 56,600 tons of fertilizer, which 
is locally distributed. Phosphate rock, chiefly from Florida, forms 
the bulk of this fertilizer. Of the other ingredients nitrate of soda, 
pyrites, kainit, and potash nitrate come from Germany, Spain, and the 
west coast of South America and form about one-sixth of the total 
tonnage; therefore this item becomes about 9,000 tons now hauled 
from Gulf ports at a rate of $2.50 per ton. The saving in this item 


16 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


would be very great, and, depending somewhat upon the intracoastal 
waterway, it may be possible that it will be economical to bring phos¬ 
phate from Florida by water. 

The opening of the river and movement of marble works to the river 
will create a demand for sand for polishing purposes, the sand of s it- 
, able grade to be hauled by river from points along the river where it 
may be found. 

Sugar and molasses from Louisiana and coffee from the South are 
now shipped to this valley. The shipments of these commodities will 
constantly increase. 

In general .—The Coosa-Alabama River possesses none of the inher¬ 
ent disadvantages that mitigate river commerce. Its length is suffi¬ 
cient to allow a saving in haulage that will more than counterbalance 
the extra cost of transfer. It does not run transverse to the lines of 
present trade, but runs toward the market for the valley’s products. 
The question is already being agitated of building a railroad from 
Anniston to Montgomery and of double-tracking the Louisville & 
Nashville Railroad to the Gulf. The railroads now cut by an east 
and west line through Birmingham exceed the railroads that run 
south to the Gulf. The commerce incident to the development of 
the incomparable resources of this section and the through traffic 
toward Panama will demand more lines of traffic toward the Gulf. 

With the incidental development of water power the General Gov¬ 
ernment can reserve a part of this power and donate it to the various 
cities and towns of the valley on condition that they use it for running 
electric cars to the river. Though this is a question of policy, the 
right is clearly given in the commerce clause of the Constitution. 

Further details concerning the above-mentioned items are given in 
appendices herewith. Freight movement and freight rates are shown 
in Appendix H. 

ETOWAH RIVER. 

8. The report of 1879 by Lieut, (now Gen.) Marshall is unfavorable 
to the improvement of this river because of the sparse settlement of 
the community and the fact that the mineral resources were not then 
developed. 

The fall of the Etowah River from Cartersville to Rome is about 
119 feet. Its improvement would require locks and dams. The main 
argument for this improvement would be based on cheapness in the 
haul of iron from the Cartersville district to the coal near Ragland or 
Gadsden, or, vice versa, the hauling of coal to the iron district. The 
present rate on iron from Cartersville to Gadsden is 65 cents per ton 
and the rate on coal from Ragland to Cartersville $1.05 per ton. These 
rates can be materially reduced by river transportation. The iron 
now mined at Cartersville and Emerson amounts, according to the 
table herewith, to 248,000 tons per year. This iron is reported to be 
hauled to Gadsden, at least the greater part. 

Owing to the fact that the water-power development along this 
river, if a reservoir dam is constructed, will be particularly valuable, 
as it is the complement of the power now developed on the Chatta¬ 
hoochee River, it is believed that in the course of a short time the 
water-power interests will take up the question of placing power dams 
on this river. 

This river is considered worthy of improvement on condition that 
the water-power interests pay their proportion of the cost. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


17 


TALLAPOOSA RIVER. 

9. Between 1884 and 1892 the Tallapoosa River was improved by 
regulation from the foot of Tallassee reefs to its mouth, a distance 
of 48 miles, at an expenditure of $84,125. 

The low-water discharge of this river is very low, being about 300 
second-feet in 1904. The river is very tortuous, and without locks and 
dams can not be made navigable, except up to the falls at Tallassee. 
This territory is naturally tributary to Montgomery. The rail haul 
is much shorter than the river haul. Until the Alabama River is 
improved to Wetumpka, there is no necessity for improvement. If a 
reservoir is built on the Tallapoosa, the lower river can perhaps be 
improved by regulation. It is therefore not considered worthy of 
improvement at the present time. 

WHARFAGE AND TRANSFER FACILITIES. 

10. There are at present no wharves other than earth roadways to 
the river, either on the Coosa or the Alabama. There is land physi¬ 
cally available at all of the river towns and cities. Rome, Ga., owns 
no proper wharf frontage. Gadsden, Ala., owns 8 acres that can be 
used for wharf and warehouse only. Montgomery and Selma own 
sufficient wharf frontage. The city of Montgomery has recently 
issued bonds for $10,000 to construct wharf and warehouse. The 
railroad commission of Alabama informs me that “if the river is 
gotten into condition where there will be all-the-year navigation, it 
is assured that facilities will be added at the points above mentioned 
to take care of the traffic, and these places can be made ports of entry, 
and as soon as facilities are put in the commission has authority to 
order connections or sidetracks to these facilities, and traffic can be 
transported to railroad cars at a nominal cost.” 

The present company operating boats on the Alabama River seems 
to be starting out with business methods and sufficient capital to 
develop river trade. They have within the last few months de¬ 
veloped a good trade on this river up to Montgomery, to which point 
they now run two boats a week, and they state that more boats and 
barges will be put on as the trade develops, and if various munici¬ 
palities do not provide wharfage and warehouse facilities, the boat 
company will provide these. It is also stated that cotton-gin com¬ 
presses will be constructed on the Alabama River. Such location of 
compresses is, in my opinion, essential and will definitely solve the 
question of actual commerce on this river. In my opinion, when 
these rivers are made navigable in fact, proper wharfage and transfer 
facilities will be provided. 

Concerning the question of aid from the General Government, it is 
respectfully suggested that consideration be given to the fact that a 
certain part of the work necessary may require the use of floating 
pile driver and dredge, and it may be practicable to arrange for the 
General Government to furnish this expensive plant. The result 
would be a very great saving to the municipalities and would be no 
great expense to the General Government. 

H. Doc. 253, 63-1-2 



18 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


FLOODS. 

11. The effect of storage reservoirs on floods will, from the prelimi¬ 
nary investigations made, be inconsiderable. The exact effect can 
only be determined when the actual storage capacity of the dams is 
determined by survey. 

RECOMMENDATIONS. 


12. The Coosa and Alabama Rivers are considered worthy of im¬ 
provement by the General Government alone, or on the basis of 
cooperation with the owners of water powers. 

The Etowah River is considered worthy of improvement from 
Rome, Ga., to Cartersville, Ga. Owing to the fact that the improve¬ 
ment of this river will give benefits only to be fully realized after the 
improvement of the Qoosa and Alabama Rivers, it is recommended 
that this part of the project be delayed until the other is completed, 
or until the water-power interests desire to cooperate in the building 
of the dams. 

The Tallapoosa River is not considered worthy of improvement at 
this time. 

In my opinion reservoirs at the headwaters of these rivers can be 
utilized to advantage. The portion of cost to be borne by water¬ 
power owners and others can not be stated prior to a survey and 
estimate. 

Capt. Cavanaugh, in his report of 1904, recommended that $30,000 
be allotted for survey of dam sites on the Coosa River proper, these 
surveys to be made whether or not the project was approved, so that 
a proper division of cost to be borne by water-power interests could 
be determined. Since his report, $20,000 has been allotted for sur¬ 
veys on this river, which surveys complete the river from Gadsden 
to Lock 2 and near proposed Locks 12, 13, 14, and 15. To make 
proper surveys of the rest of the river it is estimated will require 
$5,000. 

Of the reservoir sites, the survey of the Etowah River site is con¬ 
sidered the most important. If 50 per cent of the estimated storage 
can be obtained, it will make possible 6-foot navigation on the Ala¬ 
bama River. The estimated cost of this survey is $15,000. 

The Conasauga site is considered next in importance. Surveys of 
this site and of Tallapoosa River site are recommended, these surveys 
to be only outline surveys to determine in sufficient detail flowage 
and flooded land in order that the plan of cooperation may be out¬ 
lined, and, if approved in general, the lands can be purchased, with a 
view to building the dams later. The estimated cost of these surveys 
is $5,000. 

It is therefore recommended that $25,000 be allotted for the sur¬ 
veys necessary on the Coosa River and of reservoir sites on the head¬ 
waters of the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers in order to consider what 
portion of cost should be borne by owners of water power and others. 

Very respectfully, 


H. B. Ferguson, 
Captain, Corps of Engineers. 

The Chief of Engineers, United States Army 
(Through the Division Engineer). 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


19 


[ First indorsement.] 

Office Division Engineer, Gulf Division, 

New Orleans, La., June 19, 1909. 

Respectfully forwarded to the Chief of Engineers, United States 
Army, concurring in the opinion of the district engineer, that the 
prospective commerce to be developed and the benefits which will be 
produced by the contemplated improvement appear to be sufficient 
to warrant the expenditure of funds required to make the necessary 
survey in order to obtain full information upon the subject. 

Lansing H. Beach, 

Lieut. Col., Corps oj Engineers, 

Division Engineer. 

[Third indorsement.] 

Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, 

Washington, D. C., July 6, 1909. 

1. Respectfully returned to the Chief of Engineers, United States 
Army. 

2. The item of law calling for this examination requires considera¬ 
tion of questions involving navigation, reservoirs, water power, and 
the portion of the cost of any such improvements, including reser¬ 
voirs, which should be borne by owners of water power and others. 

3. These questions are so involved that it is impracticable to answer 
them without more detailed and extended information than can be 
secured by a preliminary examination. The board therefore concurs 
in recommending that the survey proposed by the district officer and 
the division engineer be authorized, and that in his further report he 
discuss fully the possibilities of coordinating water power interests 
with those of navigation, as required specifically by the item of law 
calling for this examination, and generally by section 13 of the act of 
March 3, 1909. 

For the board: 

D. W. Lockwood, 

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, 

Senior Member oj the Board. 

[ Fourth indorsement.] 

War Department, 

Office of the Chief of Engineers, 

Washington, July 11, 1909. 

1. Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. 

2. This is a report on preliminary examination of Etowah, Coosa, 
and Tallapoosa Rivers, Ga. and Ala., authorized by the river and 
harbor act of March 3, 1909. 

3. Inviting attention to the report of the Board of Engineers for 
Rivers and Harbors in the preceding indorsement, I recommend that 
a survey of the locality as proposed be authorized. 

Frederic V. Abbot, 

Acting Chiej of Engineers. 

[Fifth indorsement.] 

War Department, July 15, 1909. 


Approved. 


Robert Shaw Oliver, 
Assistant Secretary oj War. 


20 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Appendix A. 

Report of Assistant Engineer D. M. Andrews. 

Montgomery, Ala., May 18, 1909. 

Captain: I have the honor to submit, in what follows, a preliminary report upon 
the engineering features of a comprehensive improvement of the Coosa River, in 
which the coordination of storage, navigation, power, and wharfage and transfer 
facilities are considered, together with a discussion of the effect upon the navigation 
of the Alabama River of storage reservoirs located near the headwaters of its tribu¬ 
taries. ... 

The report is divided into the following heads, namely: Reservoirs, Navigation, 
Power, Wharfage and Transfers. 

RESERVOIRS. 

Reservoir sites have been investigated on the Etowah, Cona^auga, Coosawattee, 
and Tallapoosa Rivers. 

A very promising site was found on the Etowah, as were several on the Tallapoosa, 
and an ideal site on the Conasauga near the Georgia-Tennessee State line. _ No 
suitable sites were found on the Coosawattee below ( arters. at which place the river 
emerges from the mountains of northern Georgia. Many fine sites were, however, 
found above that point. No gaugings have been made of the Etowah River near 
Cartersville, Ga., at the site of the proposed reservoir, and Table No. 1 was prepared 
from the gaugings at Canton, Ga., by multiplying them by 1.7, this ratio being obtained 
by interpolation between the gaugings at Canton and Rome, Ga. 

In very wet years the percentage of the rainfall that reaches the river is large, 
while in dry years the percentage is small. In 1902, a wet year, the loss was only 13 
per cent, and in 1904, the dryest year yet recorded, the loss was 81 per cent. Com¬ 
paring this with Tables Nos. 2 and 3, it will be seen that the loss here was greater than 
at any other proposed reservoir sites. 

The slopes of the Etowah watershed above Cartersville, Ga., are comparatively 
gentle and covered with a heavy forest, growing upon a soil overlying the “country 
rock ” deeply in most places. This heavy forest and soil cover absorbed and retained 
81 per cent of the light rainfall of 1904. Much of this loss could probably be pre¬ 
vented by clearing away the forest cover from the watershed. 

An approximate cross section of the site proposed for the reservoir dam on the 
Etowah River is shown on photograph No. I. 1 An inspection of the photographs 1 of 
the proposed dam site shows absolutely perfect rock abutments from the water surface 
to and above the 200-foot contour on each bank. There is every reason to believe 
that perfect rock foundation will be found in the river itself. 

The Western & Atlantic Railroad near Allatoona, Ga., lies 10 to 20 feet below the 
200-foot contour for a distance of some 2 miles. If a dam 200 feet high is built, this 
section of the railroad will have to be raised or relocated on higher ground, and a 
levee will have to be thrown across the divide at the head of Allatoona Creek to 
prevent flowage over the divide. 

Mr. C. F. O’Keefe, inspector, who made the photographs referred to above, esti¬ 
mates the more valuable lands at about one-fourth of the proposed flooded area. 

In drawing No. 1 there is shown for the low-water years 1895, 1896, 1897, and 1904, 
and for the high-water year 1903, the relation of the flow of the Etowah River at 
Cartersville to the shortage of flow at Montgomery for given gauge heights. 

The flow of the Etowah, allowing for evaporation and summer flow, is more than 
sufficient to maintain a constant flow of 8,000 cubic feet per second, or a gauge height 
of 1.8 feet at Montgomery during the low-water period of the dry years 1895, 1896, 
1897, and 1904. 

From the best data available, the annual evaporation in the vicinity of the proposed 
reservoirs appears to be about 60 inches. 

When the flow of a stream, during even the driest years, is more than enough to fill a 
reservoir located upon it, evaporation need not be considered, but when the flowage 
of the wet years must be stored for use in the dry years, then evaporation enters as 
quite an important loss. 

As to the loss between a reservoir and a point below, authorities differ within wide 
limits. It is probable, however, from incomplete observations made by this office, 
that there is no such loss, or it is negligibly small. 


1 Not printed. 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


21 


Mr. Truss reports, April 21, 1909, no suitable dam or reservoir sites below Carters on 
the Coosawattee River; that is, on the navigable portion of the river. Mr. C. F. 
O’Keefe, inspector, extended his investigations into the mountains above Carters, 
and found several dam sites, at some of which dams as high as 400 feet can be built. 

The annual discharge of the Coosawattee River at Carters, Ga., from 1897 to 1907, 
inclusive, was, in round numbers, as follows: 


Cubic feet. 

1897 . 29,000,000,000 

1898 . 29,500,000,000 

1899 . 33,750,000,000 

1900 . 34,200,000,000 

1901 . 56,000,000,000 

1902 . 35,000,000,000 


Cubic feet. 

1903 . 42,000,000,000 

1904 . 18,000,000,000 

1905 . 27,500,000,000 

1906 . 52,500,000,000 

1907 . 38.500,000,000 


The percentage of rainfall in the very dry year of 1904 was only 60 per cent, the 
smallest loss shown in any of the tables. This small loss was probably due to tha 
greater slopes, and barren, rocky character of the watershed, thereby causing the 
light precipitation to flow readily into the river before it was evaporated or absorbed 
by the scanty covering of soil. 

Turning again to the list of annual discharges given above, it is seen that the total 
discharge for 1904 was 18,000,000,000 cubic feet. 

With dams ranging in height from 200 to 400 feet, and dams of these heights can be 
built on this part of the Coosawattee River, the loss from evaporation is negligible, 
and the storage of 18,000,000,000 cubic feet will furnish, with all losses deducted, a 
discharge of some 2,000 cubic feet per second for 90 days at Montgomery. 

Mr. Truss reports no practicable dam or reservoir sites on the Conasauga River 
between its junction with the Coosawattee and the mountains of northern Georgia; 
but Mr. O’Keefe found near the Georgia-Tennessee State line a most promising dam 
and reservoir site, just below the junction of the Conasauga and Jack Rivers. The 
site illustrated in the photograph 1 is ideal; the element of doubt as to its availability 
is the flow of the Conasauga at the proposed dam site. Is the annual discharge 
sufficient to fill the reservoir in the driest years? This question can be definitely 
answered only after a series of discharge measurements have been made at or near the 
site of the proposed dam covering a period of one or more years. Nevertheless, an 
approximate estimate of the flowage of this stream at the site of the proposed dam. for 
the years 1895, 1896, 1897, 1903, and 1904 has been prepared and tabulated. This 
flowage of the Conasauga River was computed from the rainfall over the watershed 
above the proposed dam, on the assumption that the same percentage of rainfall 
reached t.ne river as reached the Coosawattee River from the watershed above Carters. 
This assumption is probably not very wide of the mark, as the two watersheds are of 
very much the same character. This similarity of watersheds leads to the belief that 
the run-off of the Conasauga in dry years will probably be as large a percentage of the 
rainfall as was the run-otf of the Coosawattee River in 1907. The 1904 flowage of 
4,000,000,000 cubic feet from the Conasauga River above the proposed reservoir dam 
will give a discharge of 514 cubic feet per second at Montgomery for 90 days. 

Mr. Truss reports a number of favorable dam and reservoir sites on the Tallapoosa 
River. Only those he describes as Nos. 5, 15, 17, 19, 22, 23, and 24 are considered. 

Dam site No. 5 has a width at the water surface of 500 feet, and at a height of 100 
feet above the water surface the width is 700 feet. 

Dam site No. 15 has a width at the water surface of 250 feet, and at a height of 100 
feet above the water surface the width is 450 feet. 

Dam site No. 17 has a water surface width of 250 feet, and 135 feet above the water 
surface the width is 570 feet. 

Dam site No. 19 has a water surface width of 250 feet, and 70 feet above the water 
surface the width is 590 feet. 

Dam site No. 22 has a width at the water surface of 150 feet, and at 100 feet above 
the water surface the width is 500 feet. 

Dam site No. 23 has a water-surface width of 600 feet, and at 76 feet above the water 
surface the width is 930 feet. 

Mr. Truss reports conditions at the abutments as good, there being indications of 
solid rock underlying them. 

In 1904 the percentage of rainfall that failed to reach the river was 71 per cent, 
comparatively a small loss, and due doubtless to the same causes given as an ex¬ 
planation of the small loss from the watershed of the Coosawattee River. 


i Not printed. 

















22 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

The discharge in 1904 at Sturdevant, Ala., was 60,000,000,000 cubic feet. The 
annual discharges at the several dam sites were computed from the ratios of the areas 
of the watersheds above them to the area of the watershed above Sturdevant. 

Dam site No. 5 is probably the best on the river, as it lies below the junction of the 
Tallapoosa and Little Tallapoosa Rivers. Inspection of table of estimated flowage, 
etc., shows that the flowage of the Tallapoosa at dam site No. 5 and of the Etowah 
near Cartersville is practically the same; therefore it is safe to assume that the Talla¬ 
poosa can add 6,000 cubic feet per second to the flow of the Alabama River at Mont¬ 
gomery for 90 days. 

Silt .—A device for catching silt was so arranged that the current flows freely through 
it until the doors or valves are closed, thus permitting an accurate sample of the silt- 
bearing water to be secured. With this device samples of Coosa River water were taken 
from May, 1908, to March, 1909. The six samples, numbered in Dr. H. B. Battle’s 
report of April 30, 1909, as 11,330 to 11,335, inclusive, were taken during the freshet 
of February-Marcli, 1909, the highest since the extreme freshet of 1886. The river, 
during this recent freshet probably carried a maximum quantity of silt, and the six 
samples were therefore taken under the worst possible silt conditions. Dr. Battle, 
in his chemical laboratory in this city, determined the relative volume of silt to the 
total volume of water in the six samples of Coosa River water described above, with 
the following results: 


Sample 

No. 


Specific gravity 
of— 

One volume 
of silt to 

Marks. 

Silt. 

River wa¬ 
ter (when 
clear). 

stated vol¬ 
umes of 
water. 

11330 

No. 2. Sample of silt, Coosa River, taken Feb. 17,1909, near mouth 
of Slaughter Creek, Coosa County, Ala. River was at the high¬ 
est level of the freshet. Surface of water at the Narrows, 395.2.. 

2.32 

1.00009 

5,182 

11331 

No. 3. Sample of silt, Coosa River, taken Feb. 27,1909, near mouth 
of Slaughter Creek, Coosa County, Ala. River seemed to be on 
a stand, and at the highest of the freshet. 

2.38 

1.00010 

2,336 

11332 

No. 4. Sample of silt taken from Coosa River near mouth of Slaugh¬ 
ter Creek, Coosa County, Ala., Mar. 2, 1909. River had fallen 

2 feet below high water of Feb. 27. 

2.04 

1.00011 

1,488 

11333 

No. 5. Sample of silt taken from Coosa River near mouth of Waxa- 
hatchee Creek, Mar. 13, 1909. Water seemed to be on stand, 
but will probably go higher. (High elevation of water, 390.25).. 

2.32 

1.00014 

3,164 

11334 

No. 6. Sample of silt taken from Coosa River near mouth of Waxa- 
hatchee Creek, Mar. 18,1909. Elevation of water surface, 388.61. 
Extreme high water reached Mar. 14, 1909, 392... 

1.90 

1.00009 

5,434 

11335 

No. 7. Sample of silt taken from Coosa River near mouth of Waxa- 
hatchee Creek, Mar. 22,1909. Elevation of water surface, 388.91. 
Water was rising. 

1.79 

1.00007 

20,833 


The average of the six samples is 1 volume of silt in 6,406 volumes of water. 
Sample No. 11332 has evidently too great a silt content, due doubtless to its having 
been taken from too near the mouth of Slaughter Creek. Nevertheless, it is included 
in the general average. It is probable, also, that the water at the proposed sites of 
reservoirs is freer from silt than are the samples. 

Assuming that each year the entire silt burden from a discharge of 92^ billion cubic 
feet, equal to the discharge of the Etowah River at Cartersville, Ga., during the high- 
water year of 1903, is deposited in a reservoir there whose capacity is equal to the 
1903 discharge, it will then require more than 6,000 years to fill the reservoir with silt. 

NAVIGATION. 

This discussion of navigation will begin with the navigation of the Alabama River, 
as it will be most benefited by any addition to its low-water flow. The minimum 
flow of the river occurred in 1904, the minimum discharge at Montgomery, Ala., 
being, in round numbers, 2,000 cubic feet per second. An addition of 6,000 cubic 
feet per second will give a low-water discharge of 8,000 cubic feet per second. Refer¬ 
ence to Table No. 2 shows that at the Three Chutes Bar just below Montgomery a dis¬ 
charge of 8,570 cubic feet per second gave a gauge height there and on the Montgomery 
gauge of 1.9 feet. The minimum reading of the latter, 1904, was —1.9; therefore, an 
addition of some 6,000 cubic feet per second to the minimum discharge of the Alabama 




















ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 23 


River at Montgomery will give, on a slope of 1:2,000, an additional depth of 3.8 feet 
without any channel improvement. 

The obstruction at Three Chutes is as serious as any on the river, except those at 
the cut-off in the lower Coosa and at the old mouth of the Tallapoosa, the head of 
the Alabama River. These last named will be discussed further on. 

Careful observations were made to determine the value of n, the coefficient of 
roughness, in the Kutter formula. The results have been tabulated in Table No. 3. 
The mean value thus found was 0.03. By substituting this value of n in the Kutter 
formula: 


41.6+. 00281 + 1.811 

9 n 

(41.G+.00281) n 


1 


V R 


C=Const, in Chezy formula, 
n=Coef. of roughness=0.03, 
s=Slope, 

R=Hydraulic radius, 

=Mean depth near Montgomery, 


the value of C can be found for any values of s and R. 


The transposed Chezy formula is: b= 


Q 

c Vtf 3 * 


, in which 6=width of channel, 


Q=discharge in cubic feet per second, d=mean depth, s=the slope. By substituting 
the computed values of C, the observed value of s and assumed values of Q and d, 
the widths of channel in Table No. 2 were computed for a slope of 1:2,000, and for 
discharges from 2,000 cubic feet per second to 12,000 cubic feet per second, inclusive. 

Referring to Table No. 3 it will be seen that to obtain a channel depth of 4 feet 
with the minimum discharge of 2,000 cubic feet per second will require a channel 
width not exceeding 177 feet. An additional discharge of 6,000 cubic feet per second, 
or a total of 8,000 cubic feet per second, will give 4-foot depth with a channel width 
of 710 feet. This is greater than the average width of the river. A depth of 7 feet, 
with a discharge of 8,000 cubic feet per second, will require a channel width of not 
exceeding 276 feet. Such a channel can be maintained by dredging, supplemented 
in places by works of contraction. 

An additional discharge of 8,000, or a total of 10,000 cubic feet per second, will give 
7-foot depth of channel with a width of 345 feet, or a channel depth of 8 feet with a 
width of 276 feet. An addition of 10,000 cubic feet per second to the minimum flow 
of 2,000 cubic feet per second will give a 7-foot depth of channel without further 
improvement, and 8 and 9 foot depths with dredging and some little improvement 
by works of contraction. 

The most serious obstructions in the lower Coosa and Alabama Rivers are the shoals 
at the Tallapoosa cut-off and the old mouth of that river, in the section between 
Wetumpka, at the foot of the Coosa Rapids, and Montgomery, on the Alabama. A 
survey and careful study have shown that the obstructions in this section can be 
overcome by dredging alone, except for some training dams at the cut-off and the old 
mouth of the Tallapoosa; and that the slopes over the shoals can be reduced to a 
uniform slope of 1 : 5,000. Referring to Table No. 3, it is seen that with a slope 
of 1 : 5,000 and a channel width of 281 feet, and the minimum discharge of 2,000 
cubic feet per second, a 4-foot depth of channel can be maintained, and with less than 
5,000 cubic feet per second a channel depth of 4 feet can be maintained without other 
improvement than the dredging necessary to reduce the slope. With a discharge of 
8,000 cubic feet per second (6,000 cubic feet per second added to the minimum flow), 
a 7-foot depth of channel can be maintained with a width of 430 feet. Channel depths 
8, 9, and 10 feet with a discharge of 10,000 cubic feet per second, can be maintained 
with channel widths of 428, 352, and 294 feet, respectively; and with a discharge of 
12,000 cubic feet per second the same depths can be maintained with channel widths 
of 514, 422, and 353 feet, respectively. 

Reference to Table No. 2 shows that on the shoals at the Tallapoosa cut-off, and at 
the old mouth of the Tallapoosa, the current velocities decrease as the Coosa and 
Alabama rise. It was not practicable to measure the slopes when each observation 
was made; but the decreased velocities indicate a decrease of slope, and this is theo¬ 
retically correct, for, referring to the hypothetical, longitudinal section below, as the 
discharge increases, the velocity of the water is checked on reaching the lower pool 
by reason of the decrease of slope, and there is a piling up as at e until sufficient head 
is gained there to cause the velocity necessary to carry off the increased discharge, 
and the lower pool assumes the slope e-f. This piling up at e causes, of course, a 
decrease of slope c-e over the shoal, and the decrease of slope with increase of discharge 
continues until at high water, as at g-h, the river over shoal and pools assumes a uni¬ 
form slope. The most serious obstruction to navigation is usually found at the head 
of shoals; this is due, in part, at least, to the loss of head (depth) c-d, due to the velocity 







24 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


of approach. When the slope e-c and the velocity on the shoal decreases, this loss of 
depth due to the velocity of approach becomes less. The benefit to navigation, 
due to increased flow from reservoirs or otherwise, would therefore be greater than 
the computations show. 



The question of excessive velocities in the improved river may be raised. In this 
connection reference is made to Table No. 2, where it will be seen that the greatest 
computed velocity is 5.2 feet per second. Mr. O. E. Young, surveyor, in his report of 
March 19, 1909, describing accident to a current meter at Selma, Ala., on the 17th of 
that month, states that at the time of the accident the greatest velocity recorded was 
8.4 feet per second, and that the steamboat Nettie Quill passed on the way up to Mont¬ 
gomery while he was engaged in the work, making the distance of 82 miles in 12 hours. 
The facts stated by Mr. Young show that the velocities to be expected in the improved 
channel are well within the requirements of navigation. 

From Wetumpka, Ala., to Gadsden, Ala., a project for the improvement of the 
Coosa River for a 6-foot navigation by means of locks and dams was submitted by 
Capt. (now Maj.) J. B. Cavanaugh, which can be found in the Annual Report of the 
Chief of Engineers for 1905. Aside from the question of power, this project is probably 
the most economical that can be devised for the navigation named. It is now, how¬ 
ever, proposed to develop the power on this part of the Coosa by the construction of 
high dams with flights of locks at each; but, as the proper place to discuss this new proj¬ 
ect will be under the head of “ Power ” its discussion will not be taken up here. 

The lowest recorded discharge at Rome, Ga., was on October 7, 1903; there is no 
record for 1904. The gauge at that time read 0.2 foot and there was a corresponding 
discharge of 1,280 cubic feet per second; an addition of 6,000 cubic feet per second 
will give a reading of the gauge there of 4.3 feet. The low-water depth in the channel 
between Gadsden, Ala., and Rome, Ga., for that low-water period was 2^ feet; therefore, 
with the addition of 6,000 cubic feet per second to the low-water discharge of this part 
of the Coosa River there will be a minimum channel depth of 6.6 feet in pools and 
probably a 4-foot navigation in shoals, except at Horseleg Shoals, 1-| miles below Rome, 
at which obstruction a lock and dam is proposed. 

The Oostanaula and Coosawattee Rivers are navigable for light-draft boats from 
Rome to Carters, at the foot of the mountains of northern Georgia, a distance of 105 
miles. These rivers flow through a rich agricultural section, but if an extensive 
commerce is to be developed upon them, it is probable that they will have to be 
improved for slack-water navigation. A 4-foot navigation can, however, probably 
be maintained if a minimum flow of 4,000 cubic feet per second can be secured from 
reservoirs located upon the headwaters. 

The Etowah River has never been navigable, except, perhaps, for timber rafts and 
flatboats, and if its improvement is undertaken it will have to be done by means of 
locks and dams. 


POWER. 

The elevation of the extreme low-water level of the pool below the rapids at We¬ 
tumpka, Ala., is 152; the elevation of the proposed power and navigation dam at Lock 
2 is 535; the distance between the places named is 142£ miles, the fall 383 feet. The 
minimum discharge at Riverside, Ala., near the head of the fall is 1,225 cubic feet per 
second; the minimum discharge at Wetumpka, 1,730 cubic feet per second; the mean, 
in round numbers, 1,500 cubic feet per second. This head and discharge will develope 
65,284 horsepower. An additional discharge of 6,000 cubic feet per second from the 
Cartersville Reservoir, or a total of 7,500 cubic feet per second, with the same head, 
will develop 326,420 horsepower. 

Assuming that a combined flow of 4,000 cubic feet per second can be obtained from 
other reservoirs on the headwaters of the Coosa River, then this flowage, together 
with the flow from the Cartersville Reservoir and the natural flow of the river, will 
give a minimum discharge of 11,500 cubic feet per second, and a power development 
of 500,510 horsepower. 










ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


25 


Assuming that 75 per cent of the power can be utilized and 78 per cent efficiency, 
then the minimum, effective, primary power in each case is 38,182, 190,910, and 
292,730 horsepower. 

The above discussion considers only the minimum or primary power. There will 
'be a secondary power quite as great available for eight to nine months each year. 

Plans and locations for power dams in connection with the navigation of the Coosa 
River are being considered, and it is proposed to so design them as to serve the best 
interests of both power and navigation. 

WHARFAGE AND TRANSFER FACILITIES. 

Study has been made of wharfage and transfer facilities for Rome, Gadsden, Lock 
3, Aellow Leaf, Wetumpka, and Montgomery, and outline plans have been pre¬ 
pared. On the ground now physically available it is practicable to provide at rea¬ 
sonable expense for all necessary wharfage and transfer facilities. The cities of 
Gadsden, Wetumpka, and Montgomery own sufficient wharfage area. It is under¬ 
stood that Rome is at the present time contemplating the purchase of proper wharf 
area. 

SUMMARY. 

The following statements are based on the minimum or 1904 flow of the rivers 
under discussion: 

A reservoir on the Etowah River, formed by a 200-foot dam, near Cartersville, 
Ga., capable of maintaining a flow in the Alabama River through the low-water 
season of 8,000 cubic feet per second is practicable. Such a reservoir would prob¬ 
ably afford a 4-foot navigation on the Coosa River between Rome, Ga., and Gads¬ 
den, Ala., without further improvement except at Horseleg Shoals. It would 
increase the effective minimum power on the Coosa from 38,182 horsepower to 
190,910 horsepower. It would increase the low-water discharge of the Alabama 
River at Montgomery from 2,000 cubic feet per second to 8,000 cubic feet per second, 
the gauge height from —1.9 feet to +1.8 feet, and the minimum channel depth from 
2£ feet to 6.2 feet. 

Reservoirs on the Coosawattee and Corasauga Rivers are practicable; but the 
computations of the annual flow at the proposed sites are merely approximate. If 
further investigation, however, shows flowage great enough to furnish an additional 
discharge of 4,000 cubic feet per second during the low-water season, this water 
released from reservoirs at the proper time would probably afford a 4-foot naviga¬ 
tion on the Oostenaula and Coosawattee Rivers, and thus do away with the need 
for locks and dams. 

Added to the flow from the proposed reservoir near Cartersville, Ga., the combined 
flow would probably afford a 5-foot navigation on the Coosa between Rome and 
Gadsden, except at Horseleg Shoals. The combined flow would increase the effec¬ 
tive minimum power on the Coosa from 38,182 horsepower to 292,730 horsepower. 

The discharge df the Tallapoosa River at the site selected for a reservoir dam is 
capable of furnishing a flowage equal to that estimated for the Etowah River at 
Cartersville, Ga., namely, 6,000 cubic feet per second for 90 days or more. This 
flo'wage would, however, add nothing to the navigation or power possibilities of the 
Coosa River. 

The shortage requirements of flow on the Alabama River at Montgomery increase 
rapidly. For example, if the minimum discharge required was 12,000 cubic feet 
per second, the deficiency of flow' would have to be supplied from reservoirs for a 
period of approximately 6 months instead of the 90 days for a minimum flow of 
8.000 cubic feet per second. 

It has been shown that a possible flow from reservoirs at the headwaters of the 
Alabama River of 16,000 cubic feet per second for 90 days can be secured. This 
flowage will probably maintain a minimum flow at Montgomery of 12,000 cubic 
feet per second during the low-water season of the driest years. It will increase 
the gauge from —1.9 feet to approximately +3.3 feet and the low-water channel 
depth from 2b feet to approximately 7.7 feet without regulation. 

There is no silt problem involved in the consideration of reservoirs on these rivers, 
for, as already shown, it w'ould require more than 6,000 years under the most unfa¬ 
vorable conditions to completely fill them w r ith silt. 

With the deep reservoirs proposed evaporation is negligible except when stored 
w T ater is carried over from year to year, and even then the percentage of loss from 
this cause is small. \ 

From experiments by this office, wdiile far from complete, there appears to be little 
or no probability of loss between the reservoirs and points below. 

The method of improvement by increased low-water flow from reservoirs furnishes 
probably the best solution of the problem of securing navigation on the Alabama and 


26 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

upper Coosa Rivers; and then, too, this storage at the headwaters of these streams 
increases the water powers upon them. 

Such large alluvial streams as the Mississippi below the mouth of the Missouri and 
the Missouri itself below Kansas City would require such enormous additions to their 
minimum flow for small increases in channel depth as to make their improvement by 
means of storage reservoirs economically impracticable. 

RECOMMENDATIONS. 

(1) As a result of the recent preliminary examination, there is every reason to believe 
that the proposed storage reservoir on the Etowah River near Cartersville, Ga., will 
give the speediest relief to the navigation of the Alabama River by securing to that 
stream a minimum depth of 6 feet, and to the Coosa River, by a 4-foot navigation 
between Rome, Ga., and Gadsden, Ala., and that it will give to the people a power 
development of 190,910 horsepower, enough to supply the needs of the State of Ala¬ 
bama for a decade. 

(2) A comprehensive scheme of improvement for this system of rivers would, as 
shown in the foregoing pages, include reservoirs on the Coosawattee, Conasauga, and 
Tallapoosa Rivers. 

I therefore respectfully recommend: 

(а) That in view of the statements in (1), a survey be made of the proposed reservoir 
site on the Etowah River near Cartersville, Ga., for the purpose of locating the dam 
and spillway; of ascertaining the area and ownership of flooded lands; the capacity of 
the reservoir; the location of mines, mills, and graveyards, if any, and of roads and 
railroads within the flooded area; for the purpose of taking gagings of the river at or 
near the proposed dam site, and the preparation of maps and estimates of the cost of the 
improvement. 

Estimated cost of the survey, $15,000. 

(б) That in view of the statements in (2), surveys be made of the reservoir sites on the 
Coosawattee, Conasauga, and Tallapoosa Rivers in sufficient detail to determine the 
area of flooded lands, storage capacities, and cross sections of dam and spillway sites; 
and in connection with the survey that gaugings be taken at or near the dam sites, and 
that maps and estimates of the cost of the final and comprehensive improvement be 
prepared. 

Estimated cost of surveys, $5,000. 

Total estimated cost of all surveys, $20,000. 

Very respectfully, D. M. Andrews, 

Assistant Engineer. 

Capt. H. B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Appendix B. 

Mineral Resources of the Coosa Drainage Basin. 

ALABAMA. 

[Report of Dr. William F. Prouty, assistant geologist, State of Alabama.] 

In discussing the mineral resources of the Coosa Drainage Basin the remarks will 
be confined in a large measure to the area of the basin within Alabama, through which 
area of about 4,000 square miles the Coosa is now navigable, or can readily be made 
navigable, by the proposed locks and dams. The drainage area of the Coosa River in 
Georgia is practically the same in amount as in Alabama, but the navigable Coosa 
would pass through a much smaller amount of this area, since a little above Rome the 
Coosa becomes rapidly smaller by numerous branchings toward its headwaters. 

In general, the mineral deposits occurring in Alabama are extended on into Georgia 
and, following the strike of the rocks, run nearly parallel with the course of the Coosa 
River. 

For the most of the way the Coosa River runs in a southwest direction along anti¬ 
clinal valleys in large part worn in limestone and dolomite of Lower Silurian and 
Cambrian age. In the lower part of Talladega County, however, the river changes 
its course. It no longer follows the Paleozoic limestone valleys, but swings south¬ 
wardly and thence soutlieastwardly across the older metamorphic rocks of the Crys¬ 
talline area, through Chilton and Elmore Counties on to the junction with the Ala¬ 
bama River at Wetumpka. This brings the river for a long distance through the rich 
mineral deposits in and bordering the valley limestones, and thence, as it swings 
across the metamorphic region, it leads the navigable stream through the more varied 
mineral deposits of the crystalline rocks. The upper part of the Coosa, from Rome 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


27 


soutliwestwardly to about the beginning of the Coosa coal field, is a graded river and 
meanders on a flood plain, thus giving to its waters through here a fairly good depth 
and freedom from rapids and shoals. From this point, however, to Wetumpka the 
gradient of the river bed is much steeper, and throughout this area numerous locks 
and dams must be constructed to make the stream navigable. Thus there could 
readily be developed a large water power throughout that area where one finds the 
larger diversity of mineral resources. 

The minerals of chief importance in the Coosa Drainage Basin are given below about 
in the order of their importance: 

I. Iron ores — (a) Brown hematite “Brown ores.” —This ore occurs as a residual matter 
from the decomposed Upper Cambrian and Lower Silurian limestones which outcrop 
mainly in the central and eastern part of the Coosa Drainage Basin. The character¬ 
istic mode of occurrence is in irregular deposits or pockets in the red clay or loam. 
It is very difficult to estimate the amount of the brown ore reserves because of their 
pockety nature. E. C. Eckel, of the United States Geological Survey, has made 
what is by many considered a very conservative estimate of the brown ore reserves. 
A large percentage of the reserve as estimated for the State is found in the Coosa Basin. 
When the brown ore reserves from this basin in Georgia are added we should have 
as much as 75,000,000 tons from the Coosa Basin itself. These brown ore deposits 
are nowhere more than 15 to 20 miles from the Coosa River, and they are all compara¬ 
tively near to one or another of the different railroads which traverse the basin. 
These deposits have been furnishing ore for furnaces at Anniston, Ironaton, Telladega, 
Tecumseh, Rock Run, Cedartown, Aetna, and Rome, and also a large amount of ore 
for shipment to the Birmingham district. An average analysis of the ores show a metal¬ 
lic iron content of about 50 per cent. 

Recent investigations have revealed in addition the presence of a considerable 
quantity of brown ore in the metamorphic rocks in the vicinity of Verbena, Chilton 
County, near the Coosa River. There are doubtless numerous other deposits of a 
similar nature in the areas accessible to the Coosa River in Chilton, Coosa, and Elmore 
Counties. 

(b) Bed hematite (“Red ore”). —The red hematite, which is the main ore of iron in 
Alabama, occurs in the Clinton formation of the middle Silurian strata and is a bedded 
deposit partaking of the dip and strike of the associated rocks. The deposits in the 
Coosa Drainage Basin are located to the north and west of the Coosa River and occur 
in beds ruuning northeastwardly from Attalla and Gadsden along both sides of the 
Lookout Mountain syncline. The ores running northeast from Attalla pass by Fort 
Payne, Battelle, etc., and on into Georgia. The bedded deposits on the east side of 
the Lookout Mountain Syncline run parallel with the former across the State line into 
Georgia. In the neighborhood of Gavlesville and Round Mountain other bedded 
deposits occur still farther to the east and run parallel with the before-mentioned beds 
on into Georgia. While these deposits are much thinner than those close to Birming¬ 
ham, they nevertheless contain a very large amount of workable red ore reserves. Mr. 
Burchard of the United States Geological Survey has made a very conservative esti¬ 
mate of the red ore reserves of Alabama. His estimates are as follows: 


Tons. 

Whole red hematite reserve of the State. 483, 730, 200 

Lookout Mountain district reserve. 125, 651,100 


This gives for the Alabama (Coosa) part of the district alone more than a fourth ot 
the whole red iron ore reserve for the State of Alabama. For the total reserve one 
must add the rather extensive deposits in the Georgia part of the basin. The posi¬ 
tion of the railroads makes the development of these iron ore reserves very easy. The 
main furnaces now operating on this ore are located close to the Coosa River. There 
are four furnaces and an open-hearth steel plant at Gadsden, one furnace at Round 
Mountain, one at Rome, Ga., and another furnace not far from the Coosa River and 
connected with it by rail, at Attalla, and one likewise connected at Rock Run, Ala., 
two at Anniston, Ala., two at Ironaton, Ala., one at Talladega, Ala., and two at Shelby, 
Ala. 

(c) Gray ore (magnetite).— This ere is found in the Coosa Valley in the pre-Cambrian 
or altered Cambrian rock, especially in Talladega County, Ala., but also to some ex¬ 
tent in the same rock to the northeast on into Georgia. The deposits are more or less 
regularly bedded and the thickness of the workable beds varies from 3 to 40 feet along 
the strike. It is estimated that there are in Talladega County alone 60,000,000 tons 
of workable ore. The larger part of this amount is within 10 miles of the Coosa and 
very near the railroad. 

An average analysis of the gray ore shows it to contain from 45 to 50 per cent metal¬ 
lic iron, an amount equal to that found in a good average brown ore. This ore being 




28 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA EIVEBS. 


rather high in silica and in alumina gives good results mixed in the furnace with the 
more calcareous red ores or with the brown ores. It could also be readily smelted 
alone if circumstances rendered this advisable. 

(i d) Pyrite. —Deposits of pyrite of considerable importance occur in a bed of green / 
schist which runs along the eastern flank of Talladega Mountain. Near Gold Branch isi 
Coosa County, and near Dean in Clay County, mining operations of some magnitude 
have been carried on. For several miles northeast from Dean the bed of pyrite appears 
to be at its best, being several feet in thickness and free from impurities. An analysis 
of the pyrite shows 44 per cent sulphur and 8 per cent copper. The vein about 
Pyriton will average 8 feet in thickness, sometimes getting to be 20 feet. 

Estimating from the thickness, the surface outcrop and the depth to which the ore 
can be mined, the amount of available ore has been placed at 48,000,000 tons. This 
ore is useful not only as a source of sulphur but the cinder will yield a sufficient amount 
of copper to make its extraction profitable. 

II. Coal. —A large percentage of the minable coal of the Coosa coal field is readily 
accessible to the Coosa Paver, since the river nearest approaches the field in the 
proximity of the basins that are the most productive. These basins are the Coal 
City-Blackable, the Fair view, and the Ragland. From these basins the river is in 
no place distant more than 6 miles and in many places it is very close to them. 
Prof. McCallie has estimated the available coal in the Coosa field at 600,000,000 tons, 
all of which would naturally find its nearest outlet by the Coosa Basin. 

III. Building and ornamental stones. — (a) Marble. —Almost inexhaustible quantities 
of a high-grade marble occur in a belt running nearly parallel with the Coosa River and 
in places less than 10 miles from it. This belt has a length of at least 60 miles and a 
width of outcropping rocks of one-quarter mile, running through the northwest portion 
of Coosa County, through Talladega County, and thence on into Calhoun. The best 
marble yet found occurs in Talladega County. The principal quarries from which 
the stone has been obtained are in the vicinity of Svlacauga and near Taylors Mill on 
Talladega Creek. The marble in this belt is a rather pure lime carbonate (97 per cent) 
and has been used as a flux. This marble is receiving very wide attention and bids 
fair to rival the well-known Vermont marble in the markets. A dolomitic marble of 
very good quality also occurs on the very banks of the Coosa in Chilton and Coosa 
Counties. The Trenton and Cambrian limestones are often in places beautifully 
variegated in a manner similar to the Tennessee marble. 

(6) Granites. —Granites of the very highest grade for building and ornamental pur¬ 
poses occur in very large quantities and in positions very favorable for quarrying in 
many places in Elmore, Chilton, and Coosa Counties and not far distant from the 
river. 

(c) Sandstones. —Building stones of this nature occur in many places, especially in 
the subcarboniferous measures to the west of the river and in the Cambrian formation 
on the east side of the river in the Paleozoic districts. Many of the handsome build¬ 
ings about Anniston are made from the Cambrian sandstones. 

(d) Limestone. —The Pelham limestone occurs in vast quantities close to the Coosa 
River in many places where it could be quarried with very small cost. It is a most 
excellent building stone as well as a high-grade lime, fluxing, and cement rock. Under 
this head should also be mentioned the Knox limestones and dolomites which are often 
high-class building materials. It is through these latter rocks that the Coosa runs for 
the larger part of its way in the basin. 

IV. Lime and cement. —The limestone which is best suited for burning into quick¬ 
lime and for manufacturing into Portland cement in the Coosa Basin is the Trenton 
limestone. This stone is found in great abundance in the basin, especially on the west¬ 
ern side near the coal measures. Here also are found the very best grades of shale and 
clay suitable for mixing with the lime in the manufacture of Portland cement. The 
Trenton limestone outcrops in numerous places along the river where the rock could be 
quarried and shipped at a very low cost. The marbles which lie to the east of the 
river are a very pure limestone and would make most excellent quicklime and mixed 
with the residual clays in that district would make a most excellent Portland cement. 

V. Clays. —Kaolin, or china clay, has been found at Rock Run, Cherokee, County; 
Gadsden, Etowah County; Kymulga, Talladega County; Fort Payne, Dekalb County, 
in Alabama, in the basin proper; and just to the east, in Randolph County, Ala.,*4 
miles north of Louina extensive beds occur. 

Fire clay is found in the Coosa coal fields, and most excellent brick and pottery clays 
occur both in the Coosa coal field and in the subcarboniferous shales bordering the coal 
fields. The proximity of clay and coal makes the clav-working industries profitable 
in many places, and the presence of both railroads and navigable water would add 
greatly to the shipping advantages. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


29 


VI. Bauxite .—This mineral occurs in the Knox dolomite of the Lower Silurian rock 
and is found here and there in a belt some 10 miles wide extending northeast through 
Talladega, Cleburne, Calhoun, Etowah, Cherokee Counties, Ala., and on into Georgia. 

i On the expiration of the patents under which the manufacture of aluminum is now 
held as a monopoly the manufacture of the metal shoi Id be added to the ind 1 stries 
of the State since the deposits are near cheap water power for electric generation. 

VII. Slates. —Slates which appear from their surface outcrop to be of promising 
quality and large in amount occur in many places in Talladega, Calhoun, Shelby, 
Coosa, and Chilton Counties, near the Coosa River. The slates are from several forma¬ 
tions: The Talladega, the Weisner, the Montevallo, and the Upper Trenton. 

Of these the best are perhaps the slates of the Weisner, occurring in the southwestern 
part of Talladega County; those of the Montevallo group in Chilton County; on Buxa- 
hatchee and Clear Creeks; and those of the Trenton in the “Dark Corner” northeast 
of Anniston, in Calhoun County. 

Quarries have been started in several localities, hut have been carried to no greater 
depth than 20 to 25 feet, not below the reach of weathering, so that adequate tests have 
not yet been made. 

VIII. Graphite .—This mineral has been worked at several points in Coosa and Chil¬ 
ton Counties near the river. Some of the graphitic schists hold as much as 20 per cent 
of graphite, but the average content is much less. With advancing means of concen¬ 
tration, the graphite industry bids fair to be one of considerable importance through¬ 
out the region of its occurrence in the metamorphic rocks. 

IX. Mica .—This mineral is found in large crystals and in segregations in the coarse¬ 
grained granite (pegmatite) veins cutting through the mica schists, especially well 
developed in Chilton, Coosa, Clay, and Randolph Counties. Considerable prospecting 
and mining has been done in several places, and a large amount of mica is known to 
occur in the counties named. 

X. Asbestos, corundum, and soapstone occur locally in the mere basic rocks of the 
crystalline area in places near the river, and may, especially the soapstone, be a source 
of considerable revenue in the not distant future. 

It is seldom that nature has placed in a single small river basin mineral resources so 
vast and so varied as are those found in the Coosa Basin. Its chief minerals are those 
that are the most advantageous to the development and progress of civilization; the 
iron ores, cement material, building stones of all kinds, fuel and clays, to which are 
added with a liberal hand many useful accessory minerals. 

Of the iron ores the Coosa Basin has probably more than 300,000,000 tons; of coal, 
about twice that amount; of limestones and marbles of the purest and best grades, more 
than can ever be used; of building stonesof the best quality and variety; and of clays 
and cement materials, an inexhaustible supply. It seems useless to try to do justice 
to the natural advantages of the Coosa Basin in regard to its mineral content and their 
arrangement, and still more useless when we consider all its other natural resources, 
which are tending to make the basin a great center of manufacture and commerce, 
sending out its products by rail and stream to the world at large and receiving by both 
routes the necessary materials in return. 

It would seem prodigal for us long to delay the manufacturing of our own minerals 
into the finished products. To this end we need a navigable waterway to the Gulf 
and the development of our water powers, even more than we would were we to ship 
our raw products'elsewhere for manufacture. It is also to be noticed that every mineral 
industry that develops because of cheaper transportation by water will give to the 
railroads more and more work to do in bringing the products from the mine to the mill. 

GEORGIA. 

[Condensed from bulletins of Geological Survey of Georgia, by Drs. McCallie and Watson.] 

Brown iron ores .—The brown iron ores, in workable quantities, are limited to cer¬ 
tain well-defined districts. 

The Polk County deposits are naturally divided into six distinct divisions, namely: 
The Cedartown district, the Fish Creek district, the Wray district, the Esom Hill 
district, the Etna Valley district, and the Aragon district. 

The area embraced in the Cedartown district is from 1 to 2 miles wide, and about 
8 miles long. 

The Etna Valley district lies in the extreme western part of the county, along the 
Selma branch of the Southern Railway. This iron-bearing belt, which is about 2\ 
miles wide and miles long, enters the county from Alabama at Etna station and 
follows the valley of the same name to within a short distance of Cave Spring. 

The ore deposits of the Fish Creek district occur along the headwaters of a stream 
of the same name. The most extensive workings of this district are the Grady and 


30 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


the Central Mining Co.’s banks at Grady station, on the East & West Railroad, 6 miles 
east of Cedartown. This district, which has a northeast and southwest trend, is about 
4 miles long and from 1 to 1J miles wide. 

The Aragon district is not so extensive as the other districts heretofore described 
However, it has furnished a large quantity of ore. The main deposits occur in * 
narrow belt on both sides of the Southern Railway between Aragon and Seney. 

The two remaining districts, namely, the Esom Hill and the Wray districts, are 
both located in the southwestern portion of the county. The former deposits occur 
along the East & West Railroad,near the Georgia-Alabama State line, and the latter 
along the headwaters of Lime Creek. Neither of these districts is very extensive, 
but the ore is usually of high grade. 

The Bartow County iron deposits arrange themselves geographically into the fol¬ 
lowing divisions, namely, the Eastern district, the Iron Hill district, and the Linwood 
district. The most important of these divisions is the Eastern district, which is con¬ 
fined chiefly to the metamorphic region in the eastern part of the county. The 
iron deposits of this district begin on the Jones property, about 2 miles south of 
Emerson, and extend in a northerly direction to Sugar Hill, a distance of about 16 
miles. The width of the iron-bearing belt varies from 1 to 4 miles. It reaches its 
greatest width a short distance north of Emerson, where numerous iron banks have 
been worked in* the quartzite ridges. Some of the most important brown iron ore 
deposits of the State, such as the Sugar Hill ore banks, are located in this district. 
In addition to the brown iron ores there is also in this district considerable hematite 
of the variety micaceous hematite, which is in places of sufficient abundance to be 
of economic value. 

The two other iron districts are located in the western part of the county. The 
deposits of the Iron Hill district occur in the vicinity of Ligon post office, some 7 
miles southwest of Kingston. The district is about 2 miles long, and half a mile wide. 
Its longer axis runs north and south, corresponding to the course of the ridges, tra¬ 
versing this part of the county. 

The Linwood district lies along both sides of the Western & Atlantic Railroad 
between Linwood and Adairsville. The deposits here are scattered through the chert 
ridges, covering a considerable area, but none of them appear to be of any great eco¬ 
nomic value. 

There are only two districts in Floyd County in which iron ore has been worked to 
any considerable extent. One of these is located in the southern and the other in the 
eastern part of the county. The former is known as the Cave Spring district and the 
latter as the Silver Creek district. 

The Cave Spring district is an extension of the Cedartown district. It is only about 
3 miles long and not oyer a mile broad. However, it has some of the most extensive 
and valuable deposits in the county. 

The Silver Creek district has so far furnished but a small amount of ore. Never¬ 
theless, there is to be found here in places considerable deposits along the hill slope, 
in the vicinity of the Chattanooga, Rome & Southern Railroad. 

Fossil iron ores .—The fossil iron ores of Chattooga County occur along the line of 
knobby hills at the base of Lookout Mountain, both north and south of Menlo or Dirt- 
seller Mountain, near the Georgia-Alabama line, and on Gaylors and Taylors Ridges 
farther to the south and west. The aggregate length of these four different lines of 
outcroppings is approximately 25 miles. The most extensive of these outcroppings, 
and the one which has been worked the most, is the line of outcroppings along the 
base of Lookout Mountain, here described in detail. 

The fossil iron ores of Whitfield County are confined to Taylors and DLLs Ridges 
in the extreme western portion of the county. These ridges are the northern exten¬ 
sions of the two fossil iron ore-bearing ridges of the same name, previously described, 
traversing the eastern portion of Walker and Chattooga Counties. The ore in neither 
of these ridges has been worked to any extent within the limits of Whitfield County; 
however, there are many places where the float ore is to be seen strewn about the 
hillsides. 

Bauxite .—The known distribution of bauxite in commercially workable deposits is 
exceedingly limited. At present the known workable deposits of this mineral are 
limited exclusively to a few localities in Europe and the United States. Its occur¬ 
rence in Europe is in France, Germany, Austria, and Ireland; and, in the United 
States, in the Coosa Valley of Georgia and Alabama, and in Arkansas and New Mexico. 

The distribution of the ore bodies, so far as known in Georgia, is shown on the accom¬ 
panying map. The deposits are limited to six contiguous counties, namely, Walker, 
Chattooga, Gordon, Bartow, Polk, and Floyd, which constitute the middle and south 
parts of the so-called Paleozoic group, in northwest Georgia. Of these, Bartow and 
k loyd Counties include the vast majority of the ore bodies, grouped into fairlv well- 
defined districts. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVEKS. 


31 


Manganese .-—Commercially valuable ores occur in the northwest corner of Georgia, 
or the Paleozoic area, which are separated on the east and south from the Crystalline 
area by the Cartersville fault, the occurrence being in Cartersville district and Cave 
Springs district. Uses are for alloys, oxidizing, and coloring materials. 

\ * 



Manganese //? Georgia; E/otva, Coosa one/Tt/Zopoosa ft/oers. 
Ere/im/narg Ex am/naf/'on, Report of Jure /, / 909 . 


AM A A/a. 7. 

Rppeaoi/x JB. 


Pine Li') 


jsSophia 


Varford 

Roads 


StajHpjCreefi 


Cass ville 


owland Springs 


CassStation 


CARTERSVILLE 


r*t65TtK rtftnr 


WOODLN &*!S>Gr 


'mom *no 


Emerson 


Fn£B*iDSC 


Allatoona 


DARTOW CO. 


BOUNDA 


gia. Showing the Distribution of the Manganese Deposits, by Thomas I. Watson, Based on the 
Cartersville Topographic Sheet, U. S. Geological Survey. 

































































32 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS, 


Ocher. —The ocher belt, as shown on the distribution map, has an approximate 
length of about 8 miles in a nearly north-south direction. As indicated by natural 
outcrops and prospect pits, the belt is a very narrow one, not exceeding 2 miles at the 
widest point. 

Appendix C. 

Summary of iron and coal development , Coosa River Valley, Alabama and Georgia. 

[Compiled by U. S. Engineer Office, Montgomery, Ala.] 

FURNACES. 


Name. 

Location. 

Num¬ 

ber. 

Yearly 

tonnage. 

Silver Creek Furnace Co _ . 

Rome, Ga. 

1 

36,000 

Cherokee Furnaee Co . 

Cedartown, Ga. 

1 

18,000 

Round Mountain Tron A Wood Aleohol Co 

Round Mountain, Ala. 

1 

i 6,500 

Bass Foundry & Machine Co . 

Rock Run, Ala. 

1 

15,000 

Tecumseh Furnace Co. (old). 

Tecumseh, Ala. 

1 

i 18,000 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co. . 

Gadsden, Ala. 

2 

220,000 

Southern Steel Co. 

.do.. ’. 

1 

i 110,000 

Quinn Furnace Co. 

.do. 

1 

i 18,000 

Eagle Iron Co 

Attalla, Ala. 

1 

i 18,000 

Woodstock Iron & Steel Corporation. 

Anniston, Ala. 

2 

175,000 

Jenifer Furnace Co. 

Jenifer, Ala. 

1 

i 45,000 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co. 

Ironaton, Ala. 

2 

220,000 

North Alabama Coal, Iron & Railway Co. 

Talladega, Ala. 

1 

i 50*000 

Shelby Iron Works. 

Shelby, Ala. 

2 

50' 000 

Total capacity. 


18 

999,500 

Producing, April, 1909. 


8 

331,500 






IRON-ORE MINES. 


Name. 


Location. 


Etowah Development Co. 

Southern Steel Co. 

Tennessee Iron & Coal Co. 

Pitts-Bartow Mining & Manufacturing Co 

Virginia Iron & Coal Co. 

B. C. Sloan.*. 

Grady Iron Co. 

Alabama & Georgia Iron Co. 

Independent Mining Co. 

Woodstock Iron & Steel Corporation. 

Round Mountain Co. 

Southern Steel Co... 

Dirtseller Mountain Mines. 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co.... 

Southern Steel Co. 

Pipers Mines. 

Etna Steel & Iron Co. 

Birmingham Coal & Iron Co. 

Signans Mines. 

Parsons Mines. 

Bass Foundry & Machine Co. 

Alabama & Georgia Iron Co. 

Sparks & Simmons Co. 

Morris Minina; Co. 

Hammond Mining Co. 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co.... 

North Alabama Mining Co. 

Costello Mining Co. 

Southern Steel Co. 

Jenifer Furnace Co. 

Talladega Furnace Co. 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co_ 

Shelby Iron Works. 

Chilton County Mines. 


Cartersville, Ga. 

Sugar Hill, Ga. 

Emerson, Ga. 

Bartow, Ga. 

Cartersville, Ga. 

_do. 

Grady, Ga. 

_do. 

_do. 

Cedartown, Ga. 

Round Mountain, Ala... 

Galesville, Ala. 

Cedar Springs, Ala. 

Hematite, Ga. 

Oremont, Ga. 

Priors, Ga. 

Etna, Ala. 

Tecumseh, Ala. 

Bluffton, Ala. 

Langdon, Ala. 

Rock Rim, Ala. 

Frog Mountain, Ala. 

Cave Springs, Ga. 

Morrisville, Ala. 

Gadsden, Ala. 

Gadsden and Attalla, Ala 

Attalla, Ala. 

Citico, Ala. 

Crudup, Ala. 

Jenifer, Ala. 

Talladega, Ala. 

Ironaton, Ala. 

Shelby, Ala. 

Verbena, Ala. 


Y early 
tonnage. 


2 75,000 
i 150,000 

1 120,000 
s 90,000 

3 45,000 
2 18,000 

1 60,000 

2 35,000 
i 30,000 

2 100,000 
2 1,700 

i 30,000 
i 12,000 
0 ) 

1 40,000 
0 ) 

2 4,000 

2 40,000 

1 12,000 
2 6,000 

2 25,000 

1 75,000 
2 5,000 

2 20,000 
2 18,000 

2 162,000 

1 48,000 

2 16,000 

1 130,000 
i 50,000 

1 60,000 

2 230,000 

2 50,000 

211,000 


Total 


1,768,700 


Producing, April, 1909 


816,700 


1 Now temporarily closed owing to recent financial conditions. 

2 In operation. 

3 Building. 































































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


33 


Summary of iron and coal development , Coosa River Valley , Alabama and Georgia— 

Continued. 

COAL MINES. 


Name. 

Location. 

Yearly 

tonnage. 

Southern Steel Co. 

Altoona, Ala. 

1.300,000 
2 30,000 

Independent Co. 

.do. 

Line Creek Coal Co. 

Sligo, Ala. 

Sligo Coal Co. 

.... ’cfo. 

2 82,000 
2 40,000 
2 50,000 
2 15,000 

Ragland Coal Co. 

Ragland, Ala. 

Seaboard Coal & Coke Co. 

Coal City, Ala. 

V ulcan Coal Co. 

.do. , v . 

Normal annual total. 


517,000 

P roducing. 


217,000 




1 Now temporarily closed owing to recent financial conditions. 2 In operation. 


Letter of Mr. J. M. Elliott, Jr. 

Gadsden, Ala, April 7, 1909. 

Dear Sir:. Further answering your favor of March 16, and referring to my letter 
of March 1, 1904, a copy of which 1 herewith inclose, I beg to say that the estimated 
tonnage of iron and coal made at that time, based on the output of the mines opened 
and worked on property located on the same vein, justifies the estimate of the number 
of tons of ore at 250,000,000 and that of the coal at least 300,000,000. 

Since writing my letter of 1904 the Southern Steel Co. has bought the coal mines, 
which are located in close proximity to the coal fields located on Blount Mountain, 
mentioned in my letter, and have demonstrated the fact that this coal is of superior 
quality and that the tonnage can safely be estimated at two and one-half to three 
times as much as was first expected of these mines. 

The Alabama Iron & Steel Co. and the Elliott-Chapman Coal & Coke Co., of which 
I am still president, have increased their holdings, and we are buying up every avail¬ 
able lot offered for sale, with the expectation of it becoming very valuable and with 
the expectation of developing it whenever the market justifies doing so. We think 
the opening of the Coosa River would do much toward developing this property. 
The iron-ore mines located at Attalla, which are located on this same vein, have proven 
to be one of the most valuable mines in north Alabama. The owners of these mines 
have their furnaces located on the banks of the Coosa River, just above Gadsden 
about one-half mile. The tonnage from these furnaces amounts to several hundred 
tons per day. 

I am sending a map 1 showing the location of the iron and coal fields and their prox¬ 
imity to the Coosa River. There are valuable ore deposits on both sides of the Coosa 
River all the way from Wetumpka, Ala., to Rome, Ga., and should the Oostanaula 
and Etowah, which form the Coosa at Rome, Ga.. be made navigable, they both reach 
into a large territory of mineral deposit of ore. The valley of the Coosa is fertile and 
susceptible of being put into high state of cultivation, and I am satisfied that be¬ 
tween Rome, Ga., and Wetumpka, Ala., 100,000 bales of cotton can be produced an¬ 
nually. Some 35 years ago I was steamboat captain on the Coosa River, and know 
thoroughly the value of the farm and mineral lands adjoining this river. We then 
handled more than 50,000 bales of cotton yearly, and we kept four steamboats busy 
handling merchandise between Rome, Ga., and Greensport, Ala. At that time there 
had been no improvements on the Coosa River, yet our boats ran every day in the 
year. The railroads coming into this country caused developments to be made along 
the railroads, and as the Coosa River could only offer transportation to local points, 
the development naturally ceased along the river and went toward the railroads. 
The Coosa during all these years has been neglected and not open to transportation, 
hence the tonnage has not come to the river. What is needed is to open up the river 
to navigation, so that through shipments can be made to Mobile and out to the Gulf 
and then to all parts of the world. I believe the development along the Coosa will 
more than pay for the expense, to say nothing of the wonderful development of electri¬ 
cal power, which can be + ”med into thousands of horsepower, which is now going to 
waste, into effective inausuial enterprises that will not only give employment to 
■ ~ 


H. Doc. 253, 63-1-3 


i Not printed. 
































34 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


thousands of people, but create a tonnage that can scarcely be approximated at this 
time, but in my opinion so large that the work done on the Coosa River should be on a 
much larger scale than that which has heretofore been done at Locks 1, 2, and 3, near 
Greensport, Ala. r 

You will note from the map which I am sending you that the coal lands of the Elliott- 
Chapman Coal & Coke Co. are located on Blount Mountain, and are shown by the 
crossed blocks. The odd section on Blount Mountain carries the same coal vein as 
ours, so we estimate that the total acreage of coal on Blount Mountain is near 50,000 
acres. The mines opened and operated by the Southern Steel Co. are located at 
Altoona, as shown on the map by the finger point. You will note that the spring 
branches which form the Locust and Blackburn form of the Warrior River are located 
among the hills on the highest point of Blount Mountain. The streams shown on the 
map are spring branches, and while they will offer water for mining purposes they are 
too small to ever be considered of any value, except for that purpose. 

The Louisville & Nashville Railroad within the last two years has built a railroad 
through and along Blount Mountain, giving transportation to Gadsden for ore and coal 
that will deliver these minerals on the banks of the Coosa River at a cost of a small 
switching charge. This is being done now for the furnaces located at Gadsden. 

You will also note that the iron-ore vein shown in solid white blocks is located be¬ 
tween the coal fields and the Coosa River and practically along the same line as the coal. 
The coal lands extend north of Altoona, as indicated by the zigzag white line which 
I have made on the map. This coal is also being mined at a point farther north than 
is shown by the map. 

If I can be of further service to you, I am yours to command. 

Very respectfully, 


J. M. Elliott, Jr. 


Capt H. B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Appendix D. 

Letter of Alabama Marble Co. 

Gantts Quarry, Ala., April 30, 1909. 

Dear Sir: Under date of March 16, 1909, I received from you an inquiry relative 
to a probable effect of the development of the Coosa River on the marble industry in 
Alabama. 

I have not answered sooner because for one thing I have been away from the quarry 
a great deal, and for another, I have been endeavoring to get some information rela¬ 
tive to other companies which are incorporated with a view to the development of 
marble quarries in this region. I will endeavor to answer your questions fully and 
accurately as I can, although, in some respects, my information is not as complete 
as it might be. 

Question A. Total amount of marble available considered tributary to the. Coosa River .— 
This is an extremely difficult question to answer. From what we know of the out¬ 
crops which we are working, and the information we have obtained bv taking out 
cores ourselves, 1 am personally satisfied that this deposit extends for a distance of 
40 miles, and that, there is in it an available amount of white marble equal to eighty 
thousand million cubic feet, at the very least. Besides this, there is at least three 
times as much blue marble in the same deposit. However, there are other marble 
deposits in this county, all of them tributary to the Coosa River. In my judgment, 
if every other marble deposit in the world w T ere totally abandoned, and the deposit 
in Alabama were fully developed, it would supply the demand of the entire wnrld 
for marble for several thousand years, at the very least. So that you may say that 
the quantity of marble here is practically inexhaustible. 

Question B. So far as I know, the following is a list of companies organized for the 
development of Alabama marble, including this one: 

First. Alabama Marble Co., Gantts Quarry, Ala., capitalization. $500,000 

Second. Alabama Marble Quarrying Co., Sycamore, Ala., capitalization ... 300, 000 

Third. Bishop Alabama Marble Co., Talladega Springs, Ala., capitalization. 500, 000 

In reference to the capitalization of this last company, I am not perfectly sure, 
but I think that $500,000 is its capitalization. 

Up to the present time this company, that is, the Alabama Marble Co., with head¬ 
quarters at Gantts Quarry, Ala., is the only one that has really carried the develop¬ 
ment of Alabama marble far enough to demonstrate what there may be in it. 

Question C. Output to date per annum .—The output of the quarry has averaged 
somewhat more than 100,000 cubic feet per year. We have increased it now^ so that 




ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


35 


we expect from now on to make anywhere from 125,000 to 200.000 cubic feet per year 
at this point alone. 

Question I). The probable output in future years under assumption of an improved 
river and an unimproved river.— 1 This is an exceedingly difficult question to answer. 
However, I am personally convinced that there is in the portion of the United States 
that we can easily reach now by rail, and on a competitive basis as to freight rates, a 
market for as much as 1,000,000 cubic feet of Alabama marble per year; that is, the 
market will easily take that output by the time we increase our capacity to that point. 
This would be a business quite as large as the business of the Vermont Marble Co., 
at the present time, which is the largest marble concern in the world. It is my judg¬ 
ment that if the Coosa River were improved, we could develop a considerable business 
on both the east and west coasts of South America, and in the West Indies, and in 
Mexico, as all of these countries import and use a large amount of Italian marble at 
the present time. Moreover, with the improvement of the Coosa River and the com¬ 
pletion of the Panama Canal, we could reach the Pacific coast of the United States on 
such terms as to freight that we could compete with the Italian and other marbles 
along the Pacific coast of our own country. I think it is probably a reasonable esti¬ 
mate to say that if the river were improved, it would probably double the amount of 
marble that could be sold from the Alabama marble field. I regard the estimates of 
quantities that I have made as extremely conservative. The market for marble is 
increasing so rapidly right here that it would not surprise me at all if, within 20 
years from now, the actual demand for Alabama marble should be at least five times 
as great as the maximum amount that I have estimated. 

Question E. Names of other companies. —I have already given you this information 
under the answer to question B. 

Question F. If the Coosa River were opened up, there would be a great many ad¬ 
vantages, especially if its development for navigation were accompanied by develop¬ 
ment for water power. In that case, I think that it is probable that every marble 
mill and manufacturing plant in Talladega County would go to the Coosa River, 
because then it would be able to get its sand brought to it by water; probably its 
coal also. That would save a very material item indeed in the operating expenses of 
the plant. In the second place, the river would assure an abundance of water for 
manufacturing purposes, and a convenient means of discharging the waste. The 
availability of electrical power would be a great boon, because it is probable that the 
electrical power would not cost as much as power developed by the consumption of 
coal, even at the low rates now prevailing in Alabama, and, moreover, it would be 
possible always to expand a plant indefinitely without having to worry about a power 
plant, there being an abundant source of power close at hand to be had for the asking. 
My own personal opinion is that if this Alabama marble field is properly worked and 
developed, that within 50 years there will be a marble business here amounting, 
all told, to probably $20,000,000 per year. I believe that if the Coosa River were 
improved for navigation and power, that with the various incidental advantages that 
would accrue thereto, the marble business might easily be double what it would 
otherwise be in Talladega County, Ala. 

Very truly, yours, 


Capt. II. B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Alabama Marble Co., 

John Stephen Sewell. 

Vice President and General Manager. 


Appendix E. 

Cement, Limestone, and Clay Products. 

[From official and technical reports of the Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co.] 

New cement plant at Ragland , Ala. —The lime deposits of the Coosa Valley are 
regarded as probably the richest and most extensive to be found anywhere in the 
United States. These lime deposits are found in great cliffs of pure limestone tower¬ 
ing up over the river and valley hundreds of feet high. It is conceded that the lime 
of the Coosa Valley is unequaled anywhere in purity. The annual resources of the 
Coosa Valley derived from agriculture, timber, iron ore, lime, coal, and manufactured 
products aggregate over $52,000,000, a production which is increasing with each year. 
Of this grand annual total, manufactured products, chiefly pig iron, car wheels, bar 
iron, cast-iron pipe, lime, and cotton goods and yarns constitute over $28,000,000. 
With the completion of the improvements of the Coosa River already completed for 
a distance of two-thirds its length, the products of this wondrous valley, in addition 



36 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


to the present excellent railroad facilities, will have a splendid water highway to the 
sea, placing this valuable and ever-increasing production at low r est freight cost in 
easy access to the markets of foreign countries. 

Location and transportation facilities. —The company’s properties at Ragland are, in 
their physical characteristics and geographical location, ideal as a location for a cement 

E lant. Upon the same property, and easily accessible, there is practically an inex- 
austible supply of limestone, shale, and coal, the three materials essential to Portland 
cement manufacture. The climate of northern Alabama is mild and equable, render¬ 
ing it unnecessary ever to close the plant or the quarries on account of stress of weather. 
The company possesses unusual advantages in respect to transportation facilities. 
The main line of the Birmingham & Atlantic division of the Seaboard Air Line Rail¬ 
road runs through its properties. The company will extend for half a mile the line 
of railway connecting the mills with the limestone quarry to the Coosa River, where 
wharves will be constructed and connection made with the steamers of the Coosa 
River Navigation Co. 

On the lands of the company at a low calculation there are from 25,000,000 to 
30,000,000 tons of coal and 150,000,000 to 200,000,000 tons of limestone and shale, 
which can be converted into Portland cement at a cost not exceeding $1.75 per ton 
of cement. 


The capital of the above company is reported as $1,000,000. The inspector from 
the Montgomery (Ala.) Engineer office reports foundations already completed for 
some of their buildings. Map showing relation of shale, limestone, coal, and the 
Coosa River, is herewith. 

Cement works. 


Name. 

Location. 

Annual 

capacity. 

Southern States Portland Cement Co. 

Rockmart, Ga. 

Barrels. 
350,000 

M 

90,000 
i 600,000 

Piedmont Portland Cement Co. 

Havittes, Ga. 

Howard Hydraulic Cement Co. 

Kingston, Ga. 

Atlantic &~Gulf Portland Cement Co. 

Ragland, Ala. 




1 Building. 


Limestone quarries. 



Annual capacity. 


xjuuoi/iuii. 

Lime. 

Limestone. 

Ladd Lime & Stone Co. 

• 

Cartersville, Ga.. 

Tons. 

7,000 

Tons. 

35,000 

185,000 

Alabama Consolidated Coal & Iron Co. 

Zuber, Ala.. 

Anniston Lime & Stone Co. 

Cobb City, Ala. 

11,000 

12,000 

Legarde Lime & Stone Co. 

Legarde, Ala. . 

53,000 
100,000 

Woodstock Iron & Steel Corporation. 

Rock Springs, Ala. 

Shelby County Lime Kilns.*.. 

Calera, Ala.... 

50,000 

Total. 



80,000 

373,000 




Brick works. 


Name. 

Location. 

Capacity 
(per day). 

Production 
(per day). 

Childersburg Brick Co. 

Childersburg, Ala. 

Number. 
30,000 
32,000 
30,000 
40,000 

Number. 

Alabama Hfgh Grade Brick Co. 

Sylacauga, Ala. 


Cartersville Brick Co. 

Cartersville, Ga 

20,000 

14,000 

30,000 

30,000 

15,000 

Mansfield Slate Brick Co. 

Rockmart, Ga.. 

Rome Brick Co. 

Rome, Ga!. 

Crucial Brick Co. 



Wilpicoba Clay Works. 

Ragland, Ala. 

21,000 

35,000 

Robinson Brick Co. 

Riverside, Ala. 

. 




Total capacity, 250,000 brick per day=600 tons per day=200,000 tons per year. 


















































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


37 


Appendix F. 

List of cotton factories in Coosa River Valley. 

[Compiled by United States Engineer office, Montgomery, Ala.] 


Name of town. 

Name of factory. 

Number 

of 

spindles. 

Anniston, Ala. 

Anniston Cordage Co.. 

3,000 
12,628 
5,304 
10,000 
4,896 
15,000 

Do.... 

Anniston Manufacturing Cn 

- Do. 

Anniston Yarn Mills.. 

Do. 

Woodstock Cotton Mills.. . 

Do. 

Adelaide Mills. 

Do. 

American Net & Twine Co 

Do. 

Anniston Knitting Mills. 

Do. 

Anniston Carpet Co. 


Gadsden, Ala. 

Dwight Manufacturing Co. 

63,000 
36,000 
21,600 
27,600 
3,500 
14,900 

Jacksonville, Ala. 

Ide Cotton Mills. 

Pell City, Afa. 

Pell City Manufacturing Co. 

Piedmont, Ala. 

Coosa Manufacturing Co. 

Speigner, Ala. 

State Cotton Mills. 

Sycamore, Ala. 

Sycamore Mills. 

Do.... 

Sycamore Knitting Mills. 

Sylacauga, Ala. 

Central Mills.T. 

22,400 

Do... 

Marble City Hosiery Mills. 

Talladega, Ala. 

Cinnabee Cotton Mills. 

5,200 

5,370 

5,000 

Do.... 

Highland City Mills. 

Do. 

Talladega Cotton Factory.... 

Do. 

Talladega Cordage Co.... 

Do. 

Talladega Hosiery Mills.... 


Childersburg, Ala. 

Childersburg Knitting Mills. 


Total. 


255,398 


i 


Number of bales of cotton used in 1908, 224,200. 

Cotton ginned in 1907, Coosa and Alabama River Valleys. 
[Compiled by United States Engineer office, Montgomery, Ala.] 
COOSA RIVER VALLEY. 


State. 

County. 

Number 
of bales. 

State. 

County. 

Number 
of bales. 

Oaortna. 

Whitfield. 

4,115 

10,111 

17,669 
14,027 
8,989 
10,559 
13,745. 
10,567 
11,840 

Alabama. 

St. Clair. 

5,724 
20,843 
7,319 
9,775 
10,970 
22,232 

Do. 

Gordon. 

Do. 

Talladega. 

Do.. 

Bartow. 

Do. 

Shelby. 

Do. 

Floyd. 

Do. 

Coosa.. 

Do 

Chattooga. 

Do. 

Chilton. 

Do 

Polk. ..7. 

Do. 

Elmore. 

A labama. 

Cherokee. 

Total. 


178,485 

Do 

Etowah. 

Do. 

Calhoun. 






ALABAMA RIVER VALLEY. 


A IqVisi m a 


12,291 
40,752 
33,422 
39,908 
33,799 

Alabama. 

Monroe. 

24,021 
9,771 

Do 

Montgomery. 

Do. 

Clarke (one-half).. 

Do 

Lowndes. 

Total. 

193,964 

Do 

Dallas. 

Do . 

Wilcox. 






Appendix G. 

Letter of Inspector H. N. Sulliger. 

SUMMARY OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

Montgomery, Ala., May 9, 1909. 

Sir: I have the honor to submit to you the following report of my recent investi¬ 
gation of the resources of the Coosa River Valley and the shipment of commodities to 
and from its principal towns. 

The statistical data is compiled under county headings and covers the territory 
tributary to the Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia. A tabulation of the manu¬ 
facturing industries of each town is given, showing the capitalization, the amount 








































































































































38 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


and value of their annual production, and the general direction of their shipment to 
market. 

Table 1 of the large sheets shows in tabulated form the movements of freight in the 
different towns of the Coosa River Valley and a summing up of their manufactur ag 
industries. 

Table 2 is a tabulation of statistical data of the counties of the valley, giving their 
resources as to agricultural production and manufactured products. 

The production of foodstuff in this region is not sufficient to meet the demands of 
its inhabitants. Consequently there is a heavy import of grain, flour, hay, and meat 
from the Northwestern States and of general merchandise from the North and East; 
also most of the manufactured articles of common use are brought to this region. 

The principal exports are cotton, cotton products, coal, marble, cement, lime, and 
heavy iron and steel articles, all of which are of considerable weight or bulk, requiring 
cheap transportation to market. 

There is a large through traffic of freight from the Northern and Western States to 
the South Atlantic and Gulf States. This does not follow along the Coosa River, 
but crosses it from the northeast and from the northwest from Atlanta, Chattanooga, 
and Birmingham. 

Due to the present industrial conditions, the production of coal and iron ore during 
the past year is about one-half that of former years, and many mills and factories are 
running on one-half to three-fourths time. 

There is a great abundance of marble, coal, iron ore, and timber adjacent to the 
Coosa River, and these, together with the brick, cement, lime, and pig iron made in 
the valley, could be sent out in large quantities upon an open river. 

The data covers the present and normal production of the mines and iron-ore fur¬ 
naces. The tabulations, however, give the present production, with the exception 
of the Southern Steel Co., of Gadsden, which is included in the totals as operating. 

Very respectfully, 

H. N. Sulliger, Inspector. 

Capt. H. B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 

Statistical data upon the counties of the Coosa River Valley , Ala. and Ga. (1909). 


Counties. 


Whit¬ 
field, Ga. 


1. County population in 1908. 17,000 

2. Increase in personal tax value, 1904-1908, per 

cent.,,. 40 

3. Increase in realty tax value, 1904-1908..per cent.. 18 

4. Increase in total tax value, 1904-1908.do_ 29 

5. Capital in manufacturing plants.dollars.. 1,200,000 

6. Products of manufacturing plants.tons.. 45,200 

7. Products of manufacturing plants.dollars.. 13,025,000 

8. Capital in iron-ore furnaces.do_ 

9. Products of iron-ore furnaces.tons.. 

10. Products of iron-ore furnaces.dollars.. 

11. Capital in cotton mills.do_ 945,000 

12. Products of cotton mills.tons.. 5,100 

13. Products of cotton mills.dollars.. 1,845,000 

14. Spindles in cotton mills.number.. 27,500 

15. Cotton used in cotton mills.bales.. 19,500 

16. Cotton raised in 1907.do_ 4,115 

17. Value of cotton crop in 1907 (lint).dollars.. 205,000 

18. Corn, wheat, and oats raised in 1907.bushels.. 620,000 

19. Value of grain crop in 1907.dollars.. 485,000 

20. Timber cut per year.M feet.. 

21. Value of timber cut.dollars.. 

22. Iron ore mined.tons.. 

23. Bauxite ore mined.do_ 

24. Ocher ore mined.do_ 

25. Black lead mined.do_ 

26. Graphite.do_ 

27. Lime and limestone.do_ 

28. Marble.cubic feet.. 

29. Coal.tons.. 

30. Value of mineral products.dollars.. 

31. Coke made.tons.. 

32. Charcoal made.do_ 

33. Coal consumed.do_ 25,000 

34. Coke consumed.do_ 1,500 

35. Miles of railroad in county. 50 


Gordon, 

Ga. 


16,000 

45 

38 

42 

260,000 
10,000 
150,000 


24,000 

56 

36 

46 

1,350,000 
66,250 
2,050,000 


150,000 


5,300 


10,111 
505,000 
750,000 
615,000 


50 


Barbour, 

Ga. 


750,000 
2,250 
800,000 
33,000 
10,000 
17,669 
885,000 
965,000 
725,000 


93,000 
1,000 
7,000 
20,000 


42,000 


288,000 


37,000 

"V’75' 


Polk, 

Ga. 


21,000 

23 
18 
20 

4,250, 000 
62,000 
3,652,000 
200,000 
10,000 
150,000 
1,775,000 
7,070 
2,902,000 
83,000 
29,000 
10,559 
525,000 
545,000 
460,000 


135,000 


238,000 


82,000 
.75' 


Floyd, 

Ga. 


. 41,000 

27 

33 

30 

4, 700,000 
109,000 
8, 600,000 
175,000 
20,000 
300,000 
2, 600,000 
13,400 
4,840,000 
100,000 
55,000 
14,027 
700,000 
790,000 
615,000 


5,000 

8,000 


80,000 


16,200 
87,000 
25,000 
105 













































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 39 

Statistical data upon the counties of the Coosa River Valley, Ala. and Ga. (1909 )— 

Continued. 



Counties. 

Chattoo¬ 
ga. Ga. 

Chero¬ 
kee, Ala. 

Etowah, 

Ala. 

Calhoun, 

Ala. 

St. Clair, 
Ala. 

1. County population in 1908. 

14,500 

29 

36 

33 

780,000 
5,750 

1,550,000 

22,000 

25 

9 

17 

250,000 
15,000 
180,000 
250,000 
15,000 
225,000 

32,000 

63 

43 

53 

6,436,000 
456,000 
12,670,000 
2,125,000 
84,000 
1,260,000 
1,200,000 
5,250 
2,200,000 
63,000 
24,000 
10,567 
530,000 
730,000 
550,000 

40,000 

70 

98 

84 

7,304,000 
274,575 
10,283,000 
2,000,000 
85,000 
1,275,000 
3,050,000 
6,450 
2,890,000 
113,700 
30,400 
11,840 
590,000 
730,000 
560,000 

22,000 

2. Increase* in personal tax value, 1904-1908, per 
cent. 

3. Increase in real tv tax value, 1904-1908. .per cent.. 

4. Increase in total tax value, 1904-1908.do_ 



5. Capital in manufacturing plants.dollars.. 

6. Products of manufacturing plants.tons.. 

7. Products of manufacturing plants.dollars.. 

8. Capital in iron-ore furnaces.do_ 

2,150,000 

28,000 

1,190,000 

9. Products of iron-ore furnaces.tons.. 



10. Products of iron-ore furnaces.dollars.. 



11. Capital in cotton mills.do_ 

750,000 
3,750 
1,500,000 
57,300 
17,000 
8,989 
450,000 
535,000 
840,000 

978,000 
2,275 
967,000 
22,000 
14,000 
5, 724 
286,200 
735,000 
565,000 

12. Products of cotton mills.tons.. 


13. Products of cot ton mills.dollars.. 


14. Spindles in cotton mills.number.. 


15. Cotton used in cotton mills.bales.. 


16. Cotton raised in 1907.do_ 

17. Value of cotton crop in 1907 (lint).dollars.. 

18. Corn, wheat, and oats raised in 1907_bushels.. 

19. Value of grain crop in 1907.dollars.. 

20. Timber cut per year.M feet.. 

13,745 
685,000 
910,000 
700,000 

21. Value of timber cut.dollars.. 






22. Iron ore mined.tons.. 


76,000 

6,000 

196,000 

20,000 


23. Bauxite ore mined.do.. . 



24. Ocher ore mined.do_ 





25. Black lead mined.do_ 






26. Graphite mined.do_ 






27. Lime and limestone..»..do_ 



361,000 



28. Marble.cubic feet.. 





29. Coal.tons.. 



112,000 

785,000 


105,000 
150,000 

30. Value of mineral products.dollars.. 


190,000 

35,000 

31. Coke made...tons.. 


32. Charcoal made.do_ 



4,000 
70,000 
330,000 

115 



33. Coal consumed.do_ 

34. Coke consumed.do_ 

18,000 

6,000 

120,000 

200,000 

140 

20,000 

35. Miles of railroad in county. 

45 

65 

115 



1. County population in 1908. 

2. Increase in personal tax value, 1904- 

1908.per cent.. 

3. Increase in realty tax value, 1904- 

1908.per cent.. 

4. Increase in total tax value, 1904-1908, 

per cent. 

5. Capital in manufacturing plants, dol¬ 

lars . 

6. Products of manufacturing plants, 

tons. 

7. Products of manufacturing plants, 

dollars. 

8. Capital in iron-ore furnaces...dollars.. 

9. Products of iron-ore furnaces_tons.. 

10. Products of iron-ore furnaces, .dollars.. 

11. Capital in cotton mills.do ... 

12. Products of cotton mills.tons.. 

13. Products of cotton mills.dollars.. 

14. Spindles in cotton mills.number.. 

15. Cotton used in cotton mills.bales.. 

16. Cotton raised in 1907.do- 

17. Value ol cotton crop in 1907 (lint), dol¬ 

lars . 

18. Com, wheat, and oats raised in 1907, 

bushels. 

19. Value of grain crop in 1907_dollars.. 

20. Timber cut per year. M feet.. 

21. Value of timber cut.dollars.. 


Counties. 


Tallade¬ 
ga, Ala. 

Shelby, 

Ala. 

Coosa, 

Ala. 

Chilton, 

Ala. 

Elmore, 

Ala. 

38,000 

26,000 

17,000 

20,000 

28,000 

25 

41 


32 

40 

43 

33 


53 

18 

34 

38 


43 

29 

6 072,000 

1,025,000 



160,000 

170,000 

26,000 



13,000 

3 945,000 

400,000 



170,000 

3 604 000 

1 000,000 



93 500 

24,000 




1 145 000 

860,000 




1,495,000 



120,000 

5,435 




400 

1,935 000 




135,000 

69 100 




6' 300 

23,500 




L800 

20,843 

7,319 

9,775 

10,970 

22 ; 232 

1,040,000 

365,000 

490,000 

550,000 

1,110,000 

925,000 

645,000 

615,000 

490,000 

680,000 

710,000 

490,000 

460,000 

370,000 

510,000 







Total, 15 
counties. 


378.500 
40 
88 
38 

35,937,000 

1,280,200 

47,865,000 

9,354,000 

331.500 
4,972,500 

13,813,000 
51,380 
20,014,000 
580,000 
224,200 
178,485 

8,924,250 

10,667,000 

8,625,000 










































































































































40 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS 


Statistical data upon the counties of the Coosa River Valley , Ala. and Ga. (1909 )— 

Continued. 


• 

* 

Counties. 

— 

Total, 15 
counties. 

Tallade¬ 
ga, Ala. 

Shelby, 

Ala. 

Coosa, 

Ala. 

Chilton, 

Ala. 

Elmore, 

Ala. 

22. Iron ore mined.tons.. 

23 Bamritfi nrp mined .. .do 

230,000 

24,000 


11,000 


1 790,700 
2 15,000 
3 7,000 
<20,000 
175 
453,000 

24. Ocher ore mined.do_ 






25. Black lead mined.do_ 






26. Graphite mined.do_ 




175 


27. Lime and limestone_ . _do_ 


50,000 



2$. Marble on hie. feet 





29. Coal. tons . 






5 217,000 
2,586,000 

30. Value of mineral products.dollars.. 

31. Coke made. .. ..tons.. 

410,000 

385,000 


25,000 


32. Charcoal made.do_ 

2,500 
63,000 
185,000 
175 





25,000 

550,000 

740,000 

1,255 

33. Coal consumed.do 

34. Coke consumed... do 

11,000 


2,000 

6,000 

35. Miles of railroad in county. 

140 14 

• 

65 

26 


1 $1.75 per ton. 2 $9 p er ton. s $12 per ton. * $3 per ton. s $1.50 per ton. 


Appendix H. 

Freight movement and present railroad rates of the Coosa River Valley. 

[Compiled by United States Engineer office, Montgomery, Ala.] 


Article. 


Remarks. 


Grain, hay, flour, and meal_ 

Fertilizer material. 

Sugar and coflee.... 


Brought in from the North ana West, large bulk. 
Brought in from South America, Germany, and Florida. 
Brought in from Louisiana, South and Central America. 


HEAVY PRODUCTS. 


Iron ore. 

Pig iron. 

Cast-iron pipe. 

Iron and steel products 

Coal. 

Coke. 

Ocher ore. 

Black lead. 

Bauxite ore. 

Manganese ore. 

Lime and limestone... 

Slate. 

Cement. 

Brick. 

Cotton. 

Cotton goods. 

Cottonseed oil, etc.... 

Marble. 

Lumber. 


Sent to furnaces in the South. 

Sent to furnaces all over United Spates. 

Sent all over United States. 

Do. 

Sent to Southeastern States. 

Sent to furnaces anc* foundries in the South. 
Sent North and export. 

Sent to fertilizer mixing works in the South. 
Sent to North Atlantic States. 

Do. 

Sent to furnaces and Southeastern States. 
Sent to Southern States. 

Do. 

Do. 

Sent to Northeastern States and export. 

Sent to United States and export. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 













































































41 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table No. 1.— Railroad freight rates. 
[Compiled by United States Engineer office, Montgomery, Ala.] 


To— 


Class of freight. 


Iron (per ton). 

Marble (per hun¬ 
dredweight). 

Cement (per barrel 
400 pounds). 

Common brick (per 

1 , 000 ). 

Paving brick (per 

1 , 000 ). 

Cotton (per hun¬ 
dredweight). 

Cotton goods (per 
hundredweight). 


Coal (per ton). 

Fertilizer material 
(per ton). 


From— 

Mo¬ 

bile, 

Ala. 

New 

Or¬ 

leans, 

La. 

Sa¬ 

van¬ 

nah, 

Ga. 

San 

Fran¬ 

cisco, 

Cal. 

Mont¬ 

gom¬ 

ery, 

Ala. 

Sel¬ 

ma, 

Ala. 

An¬ 

nis¬ 

ton, 

Ala. 

Rome, 

Ga. 

Tal¬ 

lade¬ 

ga, 

Ala. 

Car¬ 

ters¬ 

ville, 

Ga. 

Rome, Ga. 

$2.75 










Gadsden, Ala. 

2.50 










Anniston, Ala. 

2.25 


$2.75 



• 





Alabama quarries. 

Rockmart. Ga_ 

.13 

$0.14 

















Penn Mills. 

.20 









Rome, Ga. 

4.75 

4.00 




. 




Ragland, Ala. 

6.30 



$6.50 

$5.00 





Rome, Ga. 

.21 


.45 






Anniston, Ala. 

.43 


.45 








Talladega, Ala.... 
Rome, Ga. 

.30 

. 

.45 








.40 


.49 








Anniston, Ala.... 

.40 


.49 








Talladega, Ala. ... 
Cedartown, Ga.... 

.32 

.80 

.53 

$2.40 







2.25 







Ragland, Ala. 

1.80 



1.48 

1.48 




$1.05 

Piper, Ala. 

1.10 




1.00 

1.00 




Altoona, Ala. 

1.10 




1.00 

1.00 





Pensacola, Fla_ 




$2.15 


$2.05 


Mobile, Ala. 







2.55 

$2.70 

2.15 











Iron ore (per ton): 

Cartersville, Ga., to Gadsden, Ala. $0.65 

Cedartown, Ga., to Gadsden, Ala.37 

Cedartown, Ga., to Rome, Ga..55 

Cave Spring, Ga., to Rock Run, Ga.12£ 


Table No. 2. —Results of observations on bars in Alabama River. Ala. 


Date. 

Gauge readings in feet. 

Discharge, cubic feet 
per second. 

At gauge station 
(in pools). 

On bar. 

1908. 






\fov 4 

Wftt.nmnlcn _. 

4.0 

Below cut-oil. 

4.0 

9,539 

6 

.do. 

4.3 

.do. 

4.3 

9, 711 

7 

.do... 

3.3 

■ a • • • do 

3.4 

7,863 

9 

do. _.. 

2.6 

.....do. 

2.7 

6,869 

9 

.do. 

2.6 

Mouth Tallapoosa. 

2.6 

6,869 

11 

.do. 

2.3 

Below cut-off. 

2.5 

5,863 

12 

.do. 

2.1 

• a • • « 40 •«••••••••••• 

2.3 

5,429 

21 

.do. 

1.6 

a a • • a ^ 10 aaaaa«*««*aa. 

1.9 

4,763 

Oct. 23 

Montgomery.. 

- 0.1 

Below Montgom- 

- 0.1 

4,232 




erv. 



22 

.do. 

0.0 

a a • a a O O aaaaaaaa a a a a 

0.0 

4,350 

Nov. 9 

.do. 

1.1 

a a a a a O aaaaaaaaaaaaa 

1.1 

6,286 

4 

.do. 

1.9 

_do . 

1.9 

8,576 

6 

.do. 

3.2 

.. .do. 

3.2 

11,645 


do 

3.9 

.do. 

3.9 

14,026 

Oct 31 

SpI m a 

-0.5 



5,093 

Nov 2 

do 

-0.3 



5,158 

3 

do 

+ 0 . 1 



5,976 

4 

do 

0.3£ 



6,545 

5 

do 

1.24 



8,180: 

6 

do 

3.8* 



14,404 

r* 

l 

. do . 

3.7 

Below Selma . 

3.5 

12, 827 

9 

do 

1.6 

. do . 

1.5 

8 , 706 

10 

. do . 

1.0 

a a a a a (1 O aaaaaaaa***** 

1.0 

7,689 

11 



. do . 

1.1 

_1 

12 

Selma . 

• 

0.9 

. do . 

1.0 

7,385 



3.65 

3.64 
3.68 
3.43 

3.65 
3.24 
3.82 
3.02 


2.72 


1.34 

1.32 

1.46 
1.58 
1.81 
2.53 
2.29 

2.83 

1.84 
1.72 
2.52 
2. 71 

2.47 


On bar. 

Value of coefficient. 

Coefficient of rough¬ 
ness. 

Slope of water 
surface. 

Area of cross- 
section. 

Mean depth. 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,200 

1:1,233 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,200 

1 : 2,000 

1 : 2,000 

1 : 2,000 

1 : 2,000 

1 : 2,000 

1 : 2,000 

1:5,800 

1:5,800 

1:5.800 





2,500 
2,053 
1,800 

6.4 

5.3 

4.6 







. 


1,703 

4.4 

72. 449 

0.0265 









1,568 

3.7 

63.239 

.0294 

2,474 

4.5 
















. 

2. 460 

5.9 

6.0 



1:5! 800 2'. 527 



1:5,800 

1:5,800 

1:5,272 

1:3,867 












3,060 

7.1 



1:5,800 

1:5,800 

1:5,800 




2.984 
2,915 

7.0 



6.9 

71.612 

.0300 















































































































































































































42 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table No. 3. —Alabama River, Ala.—Computed velocities and widths of channel for 

depth and slope given. 




Slope 1: 5,000. 

Depth 
in feet. 

Velocity in 
second-feet. 

Width in feet for discharge shown. 



2,000 

3,000 

4,000 

5,000 

6,000 

7,000 

8,000 

9,000 

10,000 

11,000 

12,000 

4 

1.8 

281 

421 

561 

701 

841 

/ 






5 

2.1 

192 

287 

383 

479 

575 

671 

767 

862 




6 

2.4 

210 

279 

349 

418 

488 

558 

628 

698 

767 


7 

2.7 


161 

215 

269 

323 

376 

430 

484 

538 

592 

645 

8 

2.9 


171 

214 

257 

300 

342 

385 

428 

472 

514 

9 

3.1 



176 

211 

246 

281 

316 

352 

387 

422 

10 

3.4 




177 

206 

235 

265 

294 

324 

353 















Slope 1: 2,000. 

Depth 
in feet. 

Velocity in 
second-feet. 

Width in feet for discharge shown. 



2,000 

3,000 

4,000 

5,000 

6,000 

7,000 

8,000 

9,000 

10,000 

11,000 

12,000 

4 

2.8 

177 

266 

350 

444 

532 

621 

710 





5 

3.3 

121 

182 

242 

303 

364 

424 

485 

545 

606 

667 

727 

6 

3.7 


134 

179 

224 

268 

313 

358 

403 

447 

492 

537 

7 

4.1 


138 

172 

207 

241 

276 

310 

345 

379 

414 

8 

4.5 



138 

165 

193 

220 

249 

276 

304 

331 

9 

4.9 




136 

158 

182 

204 

227 

246 

272 

10 

5.2 





134 

153 

172 

191 

210 

229 








SURVEY OF ETOWAH, COOSA, AND TALLAPOOSA RIVERS, GA. AND ALA. 

United States Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala., June 10, 1910. 

Sir : I have the honor to submit the following report of survey and 
estimates for the Etowah, Coosa, Tallapoosa, and Alabama Rivers, as 
provided for in the river and harbor act approved March 3, 1909: 

Etowah. Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, with a view to their improvement for navi¬ 
gation. Such examination for the improvement of the navigation of said rivers, 
including the Alabama River in connection therewith, shall include investigations 
necessary to determine whether storage reservoirs at the headwaters of said rivers can 
be utilized to advantage, and if so, what portion of the cost of any such improvements, 
including reservoirs, should be borne by owners of water powers and others. 


extent of surveys. 

Surveys have been made of one reservoir site on the Etowah River, 
of one reservoir site on the Conasauga River, and of two reservoir sites 
on the Tallapoosa River. Detail surveys and borings have been made 
at various lock and dam sites on the Coosa River. 


general description and plan. 

The Coosa River is formed by the junction of the Etowah and 
Oostenaula Rivers at Rome, Ga. The Coosa River and the Talla¬ 
poosa River form the Alabama River. Reference is made to general 
map No. 1 of the preliminary report. The Coosa River is now navi¬ 
gable, during ordinary low water, from Rome, Ga., to Lock No. 4, 




























































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


43 


Alabama, a distance of 182 miles; from Lock No. 4 to Wetumpka, a 
distance of 116 miles, it is not navigable; from Wetumpka to the Gulf, 
a distance of 323 miles, the Coosa-Alabama River is navigable. The 
present project on the lower river is for 4-foot navigation from Mont¬ 
gomery to the Gulf. 

The general plan herein proposed is for locks and dams on the Coosa 
River, for storage reservoirs on the headwaters of the Coosa and on the 
Tallapoosa Rivers, and for regulation on the Alabama River. The 
instructions call for report on the possibilities of coordination of 
water-power and navigation interests and the relative costs that 
should be borne by each interest. 

RESERVOIRS. 

4. Reservoirs will each be considered under the following sub¬ 
heads: (a) Available storage, (b) reservoir capacity and cost, (c) 
effective storage, (d) effect on navigation, ( e ) effect on water power. 

ETOWAH RESERVOIR. 

The reservoir site recommended is the one referred to in the pre¬ 
liminary report, being just below the mouth of Allatoona Creek, 
about 3 miles east of Cartersville, Ga. 

(a) Available storage .—Table No. 4 gives the run-off of the Coosa 
River watershed above Rome for all the years of record, this table 
being compiled from the Geological Survey records. The run-off at 
the reservoir site is computed from records of 1897-1908 to be 2.23 
cubic feet per square mile, which estimate is on the safe side. The 
records of Canton for 7 years give the mean annual run-off as 2.52. 
The mean annual run-off of the Etowah River at Rome is 1.82. The 
run-off between Canton and the proposed dam site is taken to be the 
same as the run-off at Rome. This mean run-off gives a flow of 2,280 
cubic feet per second, which equals 69,000,000,000 cubic feet. The 
mean flow for 1903 is estimated as 2,560 second-feet. 

The annual rainfall and run-off and the difference between the two, 
or the losses for various rivers in this vicinity for the years of run-off 
records, are given in Table No. 5. The annual rainfall record for a 
somewhat more extended section from 1856 to date is given in Table 
No. 5a. The rainfall, run-off, and temperature by the month for the 
watershed above Selma, for the years 1897-1907, inclusive, are shown 
on drawing No. 3; the daily rainfall, run-off, and temperature for 1897 
and 1904, which years are the two of lowest low water of record, are 
shown on drawings Nos. 4 and 5. 

(b) Reservoir capacity and cost .—The capacity of this reservoir with 
a dam which will raise the water surface 174 feet is 42,000,000,000 
cubic feet, which is equal to about 60 per cent of the mean annual 
run-off. The silting of the reservoir will, it is believed, be inconsid¬ 
erable. The Etowah Reservoir site is so far below the steep portions 
of the upper river that the rolling material will be dropped before 
reaching it. The amount of suspended matter in the Coosa River was 
measured and found to be negligible. Reference is made to the pre¬ 
liminary report. 

The estimated cost of dam and flooded lands is $4,000,000, or $95 
per million cubic feet. The foundation and abutments for the dam 


44 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVEBS. 


are good, being gneiss and granite. The location provides a spillway 
2,GOO feet north of dam separated therefrom by a rock knoll. Full 
details are given in Table No. 8 and in report of Mr. D. M. Andrews, 
assistant engineer. (Appendix J.) 

(c) Effective stomge .—The amount of water that will actually reach 
the power dams and navigable river, when needed, will be called the 
effective storage which, for a given year, must be the same as the 
storage required or the annual shortage below a certain flow. This 
shortage has been computed for the critical periods or } r ears of ex¬ 
treme low water in this vicinity, and is plotted for Selma, Montgom¬ 
ery, and Riverside on drawings Nos. 6, 7, and 8. The effective 
storage will be the reservoir capacity less the losses and plus the addi¬ 
tions enumerated below. One loss will be evaporation from the 
reservoir surface; another will be the increase of evaporation on the 
river due to the increased water surface resulting from the increased 
low-water flow and from the dams on the Coosa River. Both of 
these losses and the method of their computation are given inTableNo. 
6. There will be another loss, due to errors of control. This loss will 
occur when water has been turned loose at the reservoir to supply the 
amount needed at a certain predicted stage of the river, which stage 
may not be reached, owing to rain, before the reservoir supply can 
arrive at the portion of river to be affected, the result being that more 
water was supplied to the river than necessary. The period of pre¬ 
diction at the upper power dam is about two days. Local storage at 
the power dams, which provide for daily fluctuations, can largely 
eliminate one day’s error of prediction. To diminish this loss on the 
Alabama River 1. foot draw off, regulated by the Government for 
navigation, is allowed at each power dam. With the above provi¬ 
sions the amount still lost is, to a certain extent, indeterminate, and, 
to make the calculations safe, has been assumed at about 10 per cent. 

No loss for seepage from the reservoir basin is estimated, as the 
geological formation is granite and gneiss overlaid with varying depths 
of clay. 


An addition that must be made is the water that would have been 
caught during the critical period. Figured on the above basis, the 
effective storage for the year 1904 would have been 37.7 billion cubic 
feet. This is shown by the figures in Table No. 6. 

There will be at the power dams on the Coosa River a total storage 
aggregating 3.4 billion cubic feet, which storage is the amount held by 
the dams after deduction is made for the daily pondage necessary 
for 10-hour power. It is estimated that these ponds will be drawn 
down for this storage twice during such a year as 1904, which gives 
6.8 effective storage, if used in conjunction with the Etowah storage. 
As a matter of record the Coosa storage could have been drawn down 
and caught again four times during 1904. 

The results obtained from the total storage, or the storage effective 
at a certain point (Riverside power, or Montgomery navigation) 
will depend on the method of control or regulation. If regulated 
for either Riverside or Montgomery alone the effects in each case 
are seen in drawings Nos. 7 and 8, respectively. 

Drawing No. 9 shows the daily shortage at Riverside on the Coosa 
River and drawing No. 10 at Montgomery on the Alabama River. 
These curves combined would show what will be called the difference 
in phase of the shortage. With the 30 billion shortage lines on these 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


45 


two drawings in coincidence, the difference in phase shown by the 
area between the curves is 7.7 billion cubic feet; that is, to get the 
effect at each place due to 30 billion regulated for that place alone, 
it would be neceesary to have a storage of 30 billion plus 7.7 billion, 
or 37.7 billion cubic feet. The storage on the Coosa River is prac¬ 
tically equal to this difference in phase of shortage; therefore the 
Etowah Reservoir could be regulated for navigation alone, giving 
37.7 billion cubic feet effective storage therefor, and the storage at 
the power dams of the Coosa could be used for power alone. A 
combination of these methods of regulation will be most economicah 
Table A below gives the storage effective at each power dam and 
at Montgomery, all storage being controlled for both power and 
navigation. 


Table A . —Effective storage due to Etowah Reservoir and to local storage at 'power dams. 

on the Coosa River. 



Number of dam. 

Storage (billion cubic feet). 





1904 


1910 

1905 

Reservoir 




report. 

report. 

capacity. 

Effective 

storage. 

Total 
effective 
at locality. 

Etowah Reservoir. 



40.3 

30.0 

30.0 


2 

2 

1.15 

2.3 

32. a 


6 

7 

.00 

.0 

32. a 

Coosa River. 

10 

11 

12 

14 

1.65 

.00 

3.3 

35.6 


. 0 

35. 6 


12 

15 

.20 

.4 

36.0 


13 

18 

.40 

.8 

36.8 

Alabama River at Montgomery. 



.00 

6.8 

36.8 





(d) Effect on navigation .—On the upper Coosa River the low-water 
flow in 1904 was about 800 second-feet. Thirty billion cubic feet 
effective storage will increase this low-water flow to about 3,600 
second-feet (see drawing No. 8), which flow will, with regulation, 
give 4 or 6 foot navigation, depending on amount of channel improve¬ 
ment between Rome and Lock No. 1, except at Horseleg Shoals, 
where the abrupt slope requires the construction of a lock, for which 
appropriation has been made. 

The years of extreme low water to be considered are 1897 and 
1904. Drawing No. 6 gives the shortage below a certain flow or 
the storage required to maintain a certain minimum flow for these 
two years and others at Selma. It is noted that up to a flow of 
about 6,000 second-feet the 1897 shortage is greater. The rainfall 
in 1897 was 44.79 inches; the total shortage below 4,000 second-feet 
was 4.62 billion cubic feet. The total rainfall in 1904 was 38.99 
inches; the total shortage below 4,000 second-feet was 2.32 billion 
cubic feet. For any flow above 6,000 second-feet the 1904 shortage 
is greater. The year 1904 is taken as the critical year. 

The Alabama' River in 1904 had a minimum low-water flow of 
about 2,100 second-feet at Montgomery and 3,300 second-feet at Selma. 
Thirty-six and eight-tenths billion cubic feet effective storage will in¬ 
crease this minimum flow to 6,600 and 7,700 second-feet, respectively 
(as seen on drawings Nos. 6 and 7), which increase will raise the Mont¬ 
gomery gauge height from —1.9 to +0.8 without any regulation. 


























46 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

The present regulation contemplates 4-foot navigation with the 
gauge at zero. At extreme low water, such as in 1904, it is not prac¬ 
ticable to maintain 4-foot navigation on this river without very 
expensive regulation. With 6,600 second-feet flow, 4-foot naviga¬ 
tion can be secured with very moderate regulation; less than would 
be required under the present project, which would give 4.8-foot 
navigation with above flow. To obtain 6-foot navigation with 
6,600 second-foot flow, regulation in excess of the present project 
will be necessary; 1.2 feet additional depth must be obtained. This 
regulation will require a channel width of about 350 feet near Mont¬ 
gomery and about 400 feet below Selma. This amount of regula¬ 
tion is practicable and is a question of cost which can not be definitely 
estimated, but will exceed that of the present project ($500,000). 

What might be termed the natural width of the Alabama River 
is about 450 feet at Montgomery and about 500 feet at Selma. From 
Wetumpka to the mouth of the Alabama River, at its junction with 
the Tombigbee to form the Mobile River, the distance is 323 miles. 
The fall is 115 feet from Wetumpka to the Gulf. The slope in the 
natural pools of the river is computed to be about 1 foot in 7 miles. 
If the total length of pools is taken as 250 miles, the fall therein 
will be 35 feet, leaving a fall of 80 feet that will require contraction 
and regulating works. If the slope is made 1 in 5,000, this 80-foot 
fall will require contraction works for approximately 75 miles. 
If the slope is made 1 in 2,000, contraction works will be required for 
about 30 miles. The contraction works will vary between these 
two slopes, depending on local conditions and the economic method 
at a special locality. 

( e) Effect on water power .—The low-water flow at Riverside in 
1904 was 1,225 cubic feet per second. The increase of low-water 
flow at Riverside due to storage may be seen on drawing No. 8. 
With the storage proposed, the low-water flow at any power dam 
will be made up of three parts: (1) The natural low-water flow; 

(2) the increase due to the storage effective at the dam, this increase 
being the same as that at Riverside, shown on drawing No. 8; and 

(3) the run-off from the watershed between Riverside and the 
power dam. This last increment is not the run-off during extreme 
low water, at which times, as seen on drawings Nos. 9 and 10, the 
Montgomery shortage exceeds the Riverside shortage and the navi¬ 
gation storage more than supplies the power shortage. The run-off 
when the Riverside shortage exceeds the Montgomery shortage is 
therefore taken. Such condition occurs only when there is a rise in 
the Tallapoosa River, or there is a heavy rain between Montgomery 
and Riverside, at which Times (e. g., July, 1904, drawings Nos. 9 
and 10) the flow at Riverside is taken as about 2,200 second-feet, 
which flow requires practically twice the extreme low-water run-off. 
On this basis the flow and power at the various power-dam sites 
is computed to be according to Tables “B” and “C.” 

The dams that are called power dams are at those sites where it is 
believed power can be profitably developed at this time, or at those 
sites that would probably be developed for power alone were this 
not a navigable river. Such sites are dams that in report of 1905 
are numbered 2, 7, 12, 14, 15, and 18. The new numbers, according to 
the project herein proposed, will become 2, 6, 10, 11, 12, and 13, 
respectively. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 47 


Table B. —Flow at power dams on Coosa River. 


Number of dam. 

Flow in second-feet, 1904 low water, 
less lockage and leakage. 

1910 

report. 

1905 

report. 

I. 

Without 

storage. 

II. III. 

Local and 
Local Etowah 

storage (cu- reservoir 

mulative). storage (cu¬ 
mulative). 

2 

2 

1,063 

1,563 3,970 

6 

7 

1,173 

1,673 4,164 

10 

12 

1,313 

2,113 4,747 

11 

14 

1,338 

2,138 4,800 

12 

15 

1,432 

2,287 5,051 

13 

18 

1,415 

2,360 5,120 


Table C .—Horsepower on Coosa River. 


Number of 
dam. 



Cumulative local 
storage, 1904. 

Cumulative 
local and 
Etowah 
storage. 

Increase on account of 
Etowah storage. 

1910 

report. 

1905 
report. 

Power 

head. 

Effi¬ 

ciency. 

I. 

Primary, 

10-hour, 

delivered. 

II. 

Secondary, 

10-hour, 

delivered. 

III. 

Primary, 

10-hour, 

delivered. 

IV. 

Secondary 

made 

primary, 

10-hour, 

delivered. 

V. 

Additional 

primary, 

10-hour, 

delivered. 

2 

2 

Feet. 

26 

Per cent. 
50 

6,650 

6,650 

16,891 

6,650 

3,591 

6 

7 

29 

60 

7.939 

7,939 

19,760 

7,939 

3,882 

10 

12 

63 

64 

23,235 

23,235 

52,200 

23,235 

5,730 

11 

14 

50 

62 

18.076 

18.076 

40,582 

18.076 

4.430 

12 

15 

42 

63 

16,503 

16,503 

36. 450 

16.503 

3,444 

13 

18 

63 

64 

25,951 

25,951 

56,302 

25,951 

4.400 


Total... 



98,354 

98,354 

222,185 

98,354 

( 1 

25, 477 


In above Table B, Column II, the flow at each dam site is taken to 
be that due to the natural flow of the river plus accumulative storage 
from the various power dams above. This condition depends, of 
course, on the prior construction of all dams above a given dam. 

In above Table C the amount of primary power is based on the 
lowest low-water record. The amount of secondary power is taken 
as equal to the primary power. This secondary power will be avail¬ 
able for about 90 per cent of the time. This allowance of secondary 
power is within what might be called good practice. 

From the above table it is seen that with Etowah storage, all the 
secondary power becomes primary power, and in addition there is 
created 25,477 horsepower which will also be primary power. While 
the table has been made on the basis that installation without Etowah 
storage would only be made for secondary power equal to the primary, 
with the possibility of this Etowah storage the installation would no 
doubt be made for 123,834 secondary power. 

CONASAUGA RESERVOIR. 

(a) Available storarjo .—There is no gauging station on this river 
near the dam site, which site is just below the mouth of Jack River. 
























































48 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

The run-otl is estimated by comparison with the Coosawattee River 
at Carters, the character of the two watersheds being similar. On this 
basis, the mean annual run-off is estimated to be 6.9 billion cubic feet. 
The run-off for the year 1903, or the year before the extreme low water 
of 1904, is estimated as 8,000,000,000 cubic feet. Gauge readings 
should be continued at this site to determine more accurately the 
run-off, which factor in this case governs the possible storage. No 
work is recommended at this place until this run-off is more accurately 
ascertained. 

(6) Reservoir capacity and cost. —With a dam 160 feet high, the esti¬ 
mated capacity is 6,000,000,000 cubic feet. The estimated cost of 
this dam and the flooded lands is $1,150,000, or $191.67 per million 
cubic feet of storage. 

(c) Effective storage. —The effective storage is estimated as 
4,000,000,000 cubic feet. The losses due to errors of control and to 
evaporation are taken as 2,000,000,000 cubic feet. 

(a) Effect on navigation. —If this reservoir alone is built, the 
4,000,000,000 effective storage, with the control proposed, will in¬ 
crease the minimum flow of the upper Coosa River from about 800 
to about 1,600 second-feet, and of the Alabama River at Montgomery 
from 2,100 to about 2,900 second-feet for such a year as 1904. This 
4,000,000,000 cubic feet added to 30,000,000,000 cubic feet Etowah 
storage will increase the Montgomery minimum flow about 400 
second-feet—from 6,600 to about 7,000; if added to the Etowah and 
Tallapoosa storage, which must be used over a more extended period, 
it will increase the Montgomery flow about 250 second-feet, as will 
be seen from the curves on drawing No. 7. 

(e) Effect on water power. —In similar manner this storage alone 
will increase the low-water flow at Riverside from 1,225 to about 
2,150, or by about 900 second-feet. If added to the 4.1 billion cubic 
feet of local storage on the Coosa River (this local storage alone is 4.1 
billion; with Etowah it is 3.4, the difference being due to the increased 
pondage necessary for 10-hour power with Etowah storage), it will 
increase the flow about 450 second-feet. Added to the Etowah stor¬ 
age, it increases Riverside flow about 200 second-feet. The total 
power head on the Coosa River is about 270 feet. An increase of 
100 second-feet increases the power by about 2,000 horsepower (24- 
hour) delivered, the delivered horsepower being figured as 64 per 
cent of the theoretical horsepower. 

COST UF LOCKS, DAMS, AND POWER ON COOSA RIVER. 

Estimates nave been prepared as follows: Six-foot navigation, 
9-loot navigation, and for navigation and power, with local storage 
at power dams and with Etowah reservoir storage. 

The first estimate is based on the project proposed in report of 
1905. the changes being that Dams Nos. 2 and 7 are raised, eliminat¬ 
ing Locks and Dams Nos. 1 and 6. The additional first cost is 
$88,000; the saving in maintenance and operation is estimated at 
$10,000 per year. 

Estimates for 9-foot navigation were made because of the fact 
that with the high dams required and the local storage obtained, 
Dams Nos. 2, 12, 15, and 18 (1905 Nos.) will afford local storage, or 
a 9-foot navigation, or a 9-foot navigation during part of the time 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 49 

and a 6-loot navigation during such times as the storage is drawn 
off With all the storage that it is possible to obtain, a flow can be 
had on the Alabama River with which it is believed, with maximum 
regulation, it will be possible to obtain 9-foot navigation. The addi¬ 
tional cost ol obtaining this 9-foot navigation at the higher dams, if 
it is obtained now, is small compared to the cost of making the change 
later. . & s 

In the third estimate the locks and dams numbered 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 
10, and 20 in Maj. Cavanaugh's report (1905) are unchanged, the 
changes from this report being that Dam No. 2 is raised, eliminating 
Dana No. 1; Dam No. 7 is raised, eliminating Dam No. 6; Dam No. 
12 is raised, eliminating Dam No. 11; Dam No. 14 is moved upstream 
and raised, eliminating Dam No. 13; Dam No. 18 is raised, elimi¬ 
nating Dams Nos. 16 and 17; Dam No. 19 is raised to make an 
equalizing reservoir. 

Table D below gives the estimate for 6-foot and for 9-foot naviga¬ 
tion. The details of these various estimates are given in report of 
Mr. D. M. Andrews, assistant engineer, in Appendix J. 

Table D. — Navigation . 



ii. 


in. 


IV. 


Locks. 

(Old numbers given in 1905 report.) 

6-foot; 

18 dams. 

6-foot; esti¬ 
mates affected 
by construction 
of dams pro¬ 
viding for navi¬ 
gation and 
power— 
Table E. 

1. 

}• $402,000 

420,000 
542,000 
286,000 

| 813,000 

294,000 
387,000 
498,000 
582,01)0 
1,055,000 
932,000 
726, (XX) 
923,000 
629,000 
505,000 
448,000 
566,000 
105,000 

$402,000 

2. 

3. 

4. 


5. 


G. 

813,000 


8. 

9. 


10. 


11. 

| 1,637,000 

) >1,415,000 

f 2 1,165,000 

| 1,582,000 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 


Total. 


10,113,000 

4,000,000 

7,014,000 

Etowah Reservoir. 

Grand total. 


14,113,000 

7,014,000 



9-foot; 
18 dams. 


$450,000 

554,000 
008,000 
332,000 

883,000 


9-foot; esti¬ 
mates affected 
by construction 
of dams pro¬ 
viding for navi¬ 
gation and 
power— 
Table E. 


$450,000 


883,000 


337,000 . 
415,000 . 
547,000 . 
639,000 \ 
1,118,000 f 
995,000 ) 
779,000 \ 
976,000 | 
. 688,000 
550,000 ( 
487,000 J 
607,000 . 
123,000 . 


11,094,000 
4,000,000 


15,094,000 


1,757,000 

> 1,514,000 
« 1,236,000 


1,725,000 


7,571,000 


7,571,000 


1 All of No. 13 and two-thirds of No. 14, Columns I and III. 

2 All of No. 15 and one-third of No. 14, Columns I and III. 


The estimated cost of maintenance and operation is $10,000 per year 
for Etowah Reservoir, and $5,000 per year for each dam and lock. 

Table E below gives the estimate for the coordinate development. 
It is desirable that the actual physical work be divided as clearly as 
possible. In Column IV of this table is given, for the dam, the esti¬ 
mated expenditure necessary for navigation at each site. This amount 


H. Doc. 253, 63-1-4 





































































50 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

was obtained by subtracting the cost of the lock, channel excavation, 
etc., at the particular site (Column I) from the total cost of improving 
the stretch of river pertaining to this site (Column II or Column IV 
of Table D), and to this result was added the capitalized difference of 
maintenance and operation with the 14 dams of this table and the 
18 dams of Table D. 

In comparing these two plans, considering the benefits to naviga¬ 
tion only, the coordinate plan (14 dams) is credited only with actual 
money saving due to lessened maintenance and operation. The ben¬ 
efits due to longer pools are important, although their money value 
can not be definitely determined. 

In order that power at Dam No. 13 (1905, No. 18) may be used as 
10-hour power (or less than 24-hour power), and that navigation may 
also receive constant flow, or the full benefit of storage, an equalizing 
dam is provided by raising Dam No. 14 (1905, No. 19) 10 feet. The 
cost of this addition to Dam No. 14 is $220,000, and this amount is 
deducted from the proper Government expenditure at Dam No. 13. 
To avoid complications it is recommended that the United States 
build this equalizing dam. It is considered that at some future time 
it will be possible to utilize the power at Dam No. 14 (1905, No. 19) 
if the same is used in conjunction with Dam No. 13 (1905, No. 18). 
Dam No. 13 has surplus power in high water when Dam No. 14 is 
drowned out. The power installation at Dam No. 14 will require a 
power house on the bank beyond the limits of dam proposed. No 
provision for same need be made in building the dam. 


Table E .—Navigation and 'power. 


Number of dam. 

I. 

Naviga¬ 
tion only; 
locks, chan¬ 
nel exca¬ 
vation, etc. 

II. 

Common to 
navigation and 
power; high 
dams (includ¬ 
ing substruc¬ 
ture of power 
house), flooded 
lands, etc. 

III. 

Power only; 
superstruc¬ 
ture of power 
house, instal¬ 
lation, etc. 

IV. 

N avigation 
share of Col¬ 
umn II. 

1910 

report. 

1905 

report. 

2 

2 

$283,000 

$438,000 


$173,000 

6 

7 

409,000 

470,000 


404,000 

10 

12 

837,000 

. 1,527,000 


1,053,000 

11 

14 

805,000 

928,000 


743,000 

12 

15 

646,000 

768,000 

( l ) 

557,000 

13 

18 

942,000 

1,622,000 


863,000 

3 

3 





4 

4 





5 

5 





7 

8 

•3,068,000 




o 

9 

9 

10 




14 

19 





15 

20 





14e 

19e 




220,000 






Total. 

6,990,000 

5,753,000 

$7,794,000 

4,013,000 

Etowah 

Reser- 





voir.. 



4,000,000 


4,000,000 





Grand total.. 

6,990,000 

9,753,000 

7,794,000 

8,013,000 


1 Substructures are placed in Column II; transmission are lines not included. 


The total estimated cost for navigation, being the sum of columns 
I and IV, is $15,003,000. The total estimate for the coordinate 
development is $24,797,000. The estimated cost of maintenance 





































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 51 

and operation is $10,000 per year for Etowah Reservoir, $5,000 for 
each single lock, $6,000 for each flight of two locks; the high dams 
to be operated and maintained by power companies. 

PLAN OF COOPERATION. 

Basis .—In the plan of cooperation it has been attempted to make 
conditions, from the point of view of the power companies, prac¬ 
tically the same as if the river were not navigable. 

It is not thought that the General Government acquires any right 
whatsoever in the power of the natural river development at any 
particular site unless it makes an expenditure at that site for a por¬ 
tion, or for all, of the dam. If the United States builds a dam for 
navigation purposes, the rights of private parties to utilize the re¬ 
sulting power are subject to the prior rights of navigation and to the 
payment of such charge as will be a fair and just recompense for the 
expenditure which has been saved them by the Government’s 
structure. 

The total power obtainable is estimated at 222,000 horsepower 
(10-hour), all absolute primary power. The sale of this amount of 
power will require time and will, in part, depend on the construction 
of factories of various sorts. The cost of a dam is chargeable against 
all the power that can be developed at the site, and becomes a profit¬ 
able power investment only when the full power obtainable is sold. 
The costs of the water wheel and electric installations are practically 
proportional to the actual power developed. If one power dam only 
is built, it is of no benefit to navigation until all the dams are built. 
It is therefore desirable from a navigation point of view that proper 
encouragement be given to the building of all the dams. 

Natural River .—It is recommended that appropriations be made for 
construction of the low dams and all the locks and that continuing 
contracts be authorized by Congress with the owner or owners of land 
along the river at each power site, to construct the dams at the 
respective power sites for the amounts given in Column IV in Table 
E (except l)am No. 6 (1905 No. 7), where a lower bid can perhaps be 
obtained) as the Government share of cost of said dam, and that the 
terms as to time of completion and the right to utilize the power due 
to said dam or to any reservoir built by the United States for a spec¬ 
ified rental, and such other provisions as may be deemed proper be 
incorporated in the contracts. 

It should be provided that the dam shall be 30 per cent constructed 
within three years and wholly completed within five years, and in case 
of failure to make such specified progress the United States shall have 
the right to complete said dam. In case of failure of any owner of 
land along the river at any dam site to make above-mentioned con¬ 
tract within two years, or in case of failure to make specified progress 
in construction of dam, it is recommended that the United States con¬ 
struct or complete such dam and that the power be disposed of as 
Congress may deem proper. 

The rental specified in the contract on the power due to the natural 
river should finally be equivalent to commercial interest on tiie expen¬ 
diture saved by power companies by the Government expenditure on 
the dams in Coosa River. The power of the natural river is estimated 
to be 98,000 horsepower, 10-hour primary power, and about the same 


52 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

amount of secondary power. To avoid complications when, with stor¬ 
age, the secondary power becomes primary, the rental should be based 
on primary power. Rental should for a reasonable time be based on 
power sold, as only such power has an actual value. Initial sale of 
power must usually provide for cost of changing from steam to elec¬ 
tric installation; the initial rental should therefore be made low. 

If the Government expenditure at each dam is made the amount 
(in Table E, Column IV) chargeable to navigation and 6 per cent is 
assumed as proper commercial interest, the final rental per year per 
10-hour horsepower for primary power obtainable (as given in Table 
C, Column I) would be as follows: Lock No. 2. $1.60; Lock No. 6, 
(1905 No. 7), $3.05; Lock No. 10 (1905 No. 12), $2.72; Lock No. 11 
(1905 No. 14), $2.47; Lock No. 12 (1905 No. 15), $2; Lock No. 13 
(1905 No. 18), $2.50. 

A rental of $1 per year for the first five years and between $1 and 
the final rental for the next five years is considered equitable. For 
other dams not classed as power dams in this report the same general 
basis of rental is considered equitable. 

Provision concerning recompense for any increase of power that 
may be due to any reservoir the United States may build should be 
included in the contract. This rental will be considered further on 
under “Etowah storage.” 

Agreement should be inserted in the contract for Dam No. 13 (1905 
No. 18) that the United States may authorize wheels to be installed 
for extra power when the flow exceeds 12,000 second-feet. 

Etowah storage .—It is recommended that the Etowah reservoir be 
constructed by the General Government, as the benefits to commerce 
are sufficient to both justify and demand such action. Detailed com¬ 
parison of these benefits with the improvement of the upper Coosa 
and the Alabama Rivers by locks and dams is given in the report 
herewith of Mr. D. M. Andrews, assistant engineer. (Appendix J.) 

The increased power due to the Etowah Reservoir is 123,000 10- 
hour primary horsepower, being (1) 98,000 secondary made into pri¬ 
mary power, and (2) 25,000 horsepower additional primary power 
created, or this 25,000 horsepower may be considered as primary 
power that was formerly secondary power of lower grade, being avail¬ 
able during a shorter period than (1). The difference of value of pri¬ 
mary and secondary power is variously stated by various authorities. 
In this section, where coal is comparatively cheap, this difference is 
greater than where coal is more costly, and the profitable sale of sec¬ 
ondary power will perhaps for a long period be limited to cases where 
intermittent power can be profitably used or auxiliary steam plants 
are already installed. The difference in value between this secondary 
and primary power is estimated to be at least $5 per year per 10-hour 
horsepower. 

It is recommended that each company at a power dam on the lower 
river be granted the right to utilize the power due to the increased 
flow created by the reservoir and pay therefor a charge on the basis 
of $1 per year for the first 5 years, $2 per year for the next 5 years, 
$3 per year for the following 10 years, on all 10-liour power sold in 
excess of the amount due to the minimum natural flow of the river, 
the actual amount of this excess power to be determined by the 
Secretary of War, and that after 20 years the charge be $3 on all 
power obtainable. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVEBS. 53 

General. —It is recommended that it be required that the rate of 
sale to the consumer of all power due in part to Government expendi¬ 
ture for navigation be such as will be equitable to both the power 
company and the consumer, and that complaints concerning the rate 
shall be determined by the proper United States courts, to which 
complaints in all cases the United States shall be a party. As the 
Etowah Reservoir is in Georgia and the power will be produced in 
Alabama, United States courts will have jurisdiction. It should be 
provided that the maintenance and operation of power dams be 
assumed by the power companies, the variation of the pool level 
being as directed by the United States within the limits above set 
forth for obtaining the maximum combined benefits to power and 
navigation. It should also be provided that power necessary for 
operation of locks be sold to the United States at an equitable rate. 

TALLAPOOSA RIVER RESERVOIRS. 

Two reservoir sites have been surveyed on the Tallapoosa River, 
site No. 1, the lower, being at Cherokee Bluff near Double Bridge 
Ferry, about 17 miles above Milstead, Ala.; site No. 2, the upper, 
being just below the mouth of the Little Tallapoosa River. 

Site No. 1, Cherokee Bluff'. — (a) Available and effective storage .— 
Gauge and discharge records of the United States Geological Survey 
at Sturdevant on this river extend from 1901 to date. The critical 
dry period in this vi< inity was 1903,1904, and 1905. Drainage area 
at Sturdevant is 2,334 square miles. The mean annual run-off is 
3,744 second-feet. The drainage area at the dam site is 2,848 square 
miles. The estimated mean annual run-off is 4,200 second-feet, or 
132,000,000,000 cubic feet. The loss due to evaporation is figured as 
above for the Etowah reservoir, being from two to five billion cubic 
feet for various reservoirs, as seen in Table No. 12 of Appendix 1. 

The loss due to error of control for navigation is taken as about 5 
per cent, the period of prediction being only one day as against a 
period of two days for the Etowah reservoir. Drawing No. 11 shows 
the mean monthly run-off at the dam site. 

(b) Reservoir capacity and cost. —The site for a dam at this point is 
excellent. A dam can be built up to 200 feet high. The estimated 
cost and capacity with draw-off at 90 feet is as follows: 


Height. 

Capacity. 

Cost. 

Feet. 

Billion cubic 
feel. 


130 

30 

$1,850,000 

160 

69 

3,025.000 

190 

131 

4,800,000 


Similar data for dam of other heights is given in Table No. 11 and 
drawing No. 15. So far as known, this reservoir site, considering 
storage capacity, available flow, reasonable height of dam, and low 
value *of flooded property, is not surpassed. 

( e ) Effect on navigation and power. —There are an unlimited number 
of variations of control for water stored at this site. For any assumed 
amount of storage different methods of control give different benefits 
to navigation and to power. Table No. 12 gives the storage capacity 
required for power alone, or for keeping a specified flow at dam. 














54 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEKS. 


Table No. 13 gives storage required for navigation alone, or for 
keeping a specified minimum flow in the Alabama River at Mont¬ 
gomery with this reservoir alone, or in combination with Etowah 
Reservoir. Table No. 14 gives various possible combinations in 
conjunction with Etowah storage. The storage required for any 
special combination was obtained by adding to the storage necessary 
for a certain flow at dam, the extra amount required to hold the 
Montgomery gauge at a certain point after it was held at 6,600 
second-feet by Etowah storage. But two combinations or plans 
will be considered in detail. The benefits to navigation and to 
power for any other plan can be found in a similar manner. Drawing 
No. 12 (combined power storage) shows the shortage, or daily flow, 
at Tallapoosa River site No. 1, to which is added the constant River¬ 
side shortage, which equals 40,000,000,000 cubic feet for 1904. This 
Riverside constant is the Etowah Reservoir and Coosa local storage 
(for this purpose assumed to be above Riverside) less losses and 
draw-off for 1903. This combined power storage curve compared 
with the Montgomery (or navigation) shortage curve, with any 
assumed constant flow at dam coinciding with a constant minimum 
at Montgomery (e. g., dam 2,500 second-feet and Montgomery 8,000 
second-feet) gives the total common storage, the extra storage 
needed for navigation, and the power storage that is of no value to 
navigation for any combination. 

Plan A, 160-foot darn .—A reservoir dam 160 feet high drawn down 
to 100 feet gives 64,000,000,000 cubic feet of storage. The estimated 
cost of reservoir dam and flooded lands, with a 25-foot dam in tail- 
race (which may not be necessary), and equalizing dam in lower river, 
is $3,025,000. The control proposed is 3,000 second-feet flow at 
reservoir dam and 9,000 second-feet at Montgomery. As seen from 
Table No. 14, 60,000,000,000 cubic feet gives this combination. 
Four billion cubic feet is allowed for loss due to error of control for 
navigation. Evaporation loss is included in Table No. 14. In 
extreme emergency, the reservoir can be drawn down to 90 feet. 

Benefits to navigation .—Nine thousand second-feet at Montgomery 
will raise the gauge to +1.95 and with present project regulation (4 
feet navigable depth with gauge at zero) will give 6-foot navigation 
at all times. By further regulation this navigable depth can be 
increased to meet the increased needs of commerce. Etowah storage 
will hold the flow at Montgomery at 6,600 second-feet. To raise the 
flow from 6,600 to 9,000 second-feet, independent of power, will 
require 29,000 000,000 cubic feet storage capacity on the Tallapoosa 
River, which demands a dam 120 feet high, the estimated cost of dam 
and flooded land being $1,480,000, which is the proper limit of naviga¬ 
tion expenditure for above results. 

Benefits to power .—There are at present two power dams below 
this proposed reservoir site, their total head being 100 feet. A head 
of 140 feet can be developed below this reservoir. The low-water 
flow in 1904 was less than 500 second-feet. It is estimated that with 
their pondage 800 second-feet minimum flow can be maintained, 
which will give (in round numbers) a total primary delivered power 
of 14,000 horsepower (10-hour). A minimum flowage of 3,000 
second-feet will give, in round numbers, at the reservoir dam (130 
feet power head and 64 per cent efficiency), 68,000 horsepower (10- 
hour), and at the other dams 52,000 horsepower (10-hour). The 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


55 


total new power is 106,000 horsepower (10-hour). To obtain this 
power independent of navigation it is estimated that a dam 152 feet 
high would be required, the cost of dam and flooded lands being 
$2,540,000, which is the proper limit for power expenditure under 
this plan. 

Plan oj cooperation .—It is recommended that the Government 
expenditure be made $1,480,000, and the power expenditure be made 
$1,545,000. The saving to the power interests is $995,000, on which 
they should pay commercial interest in the form of rental on that 
part ol this power created in part by Government expenditure—in 
this case, 39 per cent of total new power, or 41,000 horsepower (10- 
hour). Six per cent interest on this saving will more than equal 3 per 
cent on total Government investment. The following rental is 
recommended: 50 cents per year for 5 years, and thereafter $1 per 
year lor each 10-hour horsepower on 39 per cent of the total power 
sold, on which part of the total power provision should be made for 
equitable sale and proper time limit of lease. 

Plan B, 131-foot dam .—Reservoir dam 131 feet high, drawn down 
to 90 feet, gives 30,000,000,000 cubic feet storage capacity. The 
estimated cost, including equalizing dam, is $1,850,000. The control 
proposed is 2,500 second-feet at dam and 8,000 second-feet at Mont¬ 
gomery, including Etowah storage. 

Benefits to navigation .—Eight thousand second-feet at Montgomery 
will raise the gauge to +1.5 feet and with regulation exceeding present 
project (4 feet at zero) will give 6-foot navigation. To obtain this 
benefit independent of power would require a dam 100 feet high, which 
would cost $1,086,000, which is the limit of proper navigation expend¬ 
iture under this plan. 

Benefits to power .—This plan gives total power, in round numbers, 
• on above-named basis of 50,000 horsepower (10-hour) at reservoir 
dam and 110,000 horsepower (10-liour) at reservoir and other dams, 
or 96,000 horsepower (10-liour) new power. To obtain this power 
independent of navigation would require a dam 128 feet high, esti¬ 
mated to cost $1,675,000, which is the proper limit of power expendi¬ 
ture on dam and flooded land under this plan. Under this plan, the 
Government expenditure of $1,086,000 and rental of $1 per year for 
five years, thereafter $1.50 per year per 10-hour horsepower on 65 per 
cent of total power sold, is recommended. The Government expend¬ 
iture on dam helps create 65 per cent total new power. 

Plan recommended .—It is understood that the present plan of the 
power interests owning this site is to build a dam 130 feet high. The 
130-foot dam is proportionally more economical than a higher struc¬ 
ture, as up to a flow of 2,500 seond-feet at the dam the surplus of a 
year such as 1905 is sufficient for the shortage (navigation and power) 
of that year. This 130-foot development is required to provide for 
but a one-year storage. A greater storage than given by a 130-foot 
dam drawn down to 90 feet must provide for shortage through a 
period of three years. A 190-foot dam drawn down to 90 feet will 
practically equalize the flow of the river. Such a dam would be 
nearly full only a small portion of the time, with a resulting loss of 
power head. It may perhaps eventually be proper to build the 200- 
foot dam for the increased power head, the draw-off being limited as 
may be most beneficial, reservoir No. 2 at Blakes Ferry being built for 
extra storage. Ten thousand second-feet is considered a proper limit 


' 56 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

for navigation, as it will give 6-foot navigation with moderate regu¬ 
lation, and with that flow 9-foot navigation can, it is believed, even¬ 
tually be obtained by regulation. This flow could be obtained at an 
estimated cost of $2,350,000 by a dam 149 feet high if controlled for 
navigation only. Any plan for a higher dam depends on the power 
interests. No recommendation for storage for navigation alone is 
made at this time. It is believed that now, as the possibilities are 
known, some agreement can be reached. Any plan up to a 200-foot 
dam is recommended for approval, the method of control and relative 
share of costs and benefits to be based on above data. A clear-cut 
and satisfactory method of procedure would be to let the contract 
to the power interests for building the dam for the amount of proper 
navigation expenditure and in this contract incorporate any desir¬ 
able agreement as to rental and also equitable sale of power due to 
Government expenditure. The maintenance and operation of this 
reservoir under the plan agreed upon should be borne by the power 
company. 

Equalizing dam .—In order that this power may be used as 10-hour 
power and navigation may also receive the full benefit of storage, it 
will be necessary to construct an equalizing dam lower down on this 
river. The estimated cost of this dam is $100,000, which is included 
in totals for above plans A and B. In case the water-power interests 
construct the storage dam independently of the Government, the 
Government can, by building. this equalizing dam, obtain decided 
benefits from this storage. The estimated cost of maintenance and 
operation of this dam is $5,000 per year. 

Site No. 2, or Blokes Ferry .—The drainage area at this dam site is 
practically one-half the drainage area at site No. 1; the run-off, 
therefore, will be slightly greater than one-half of the run-off at that 
site, which will be amply sufficient to fill any reservoir that can be • 
built at this site. 

With a dam 130 feet high, the estimated capacity is 11,000,000,000 
cubic feet, the estimated cost of this dam and the flooded lands being 
$1,340,000, or $122 per million cubic feet of storage. 

The effective storage is estimated as 9,000,000,000 cubic feet, if 
the stored water is used during the same year in which it is caught. 
If it is used in conjunction with other reservoirs, where the storage 
must be held for a longer period, the loss due to evaporation will 
correspondingly increase. 

It is recommended that this reservoir be not further considered, as 
all the available storage of this stream can be caught in reservoir No. 1. 

FLOOD CONTROL. 

The Etowah Reservoir will reduce the floods at Rome, Ga., ordi¬ 
narily by perhaps 50 per cent. The Tallapoosa Reservoir will reduce 
the floods at Montgomery by perhaps 12 per cent. Full discussions 
of these effects are given in report of Mr. D. M. Andrews, assistant 
engineer, Appendix J. 

GENERAL SUMMARY. 

The engineering constructions proposed present no uncertain 
feature or especial difficulties. Foundations and abutments for all 
high dams, both reservoir and power, are good, being granite and 
gneiss. The heights of dams and lifts of locks are within the limits 
of existing structures. For safety, canals are provided around high 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 57 

dams. There is no ice to contend with. Construction materials, 
stone, sand, iron, cement, and lumber are conveniently near. Labor 
in this section is of good quality. The estimates of cost have been 
made reasonably liberal, and it is believed the work can be completed 
within the amounts named. The estimates for power equipment to 
be installed are based on correspondence with makers of hydraulic 
and electric equipment. These estimates are sufficiently close to 
show that, if necessary, the Government can profitably make complete 
installation at any site. . 

The reservoirs are ordinarily controlled for certain flow at power 
dams, and during periods of extreme low water an extra flow is 
allowed at the Tallapoosa Reservoir. The pondage at Coosa power 
dams and equalizing dam prevent great loss (estimated at 10 per 
cent); the Tallapoosa Reservoir is about one day above Montgomery 
(5 per cent loss is allowed). Though the method of control will be 
beneficially changed with experience, the method proposed would, 
during the last 20 years, have given the results stated. It is thought 
to be very probable that, after all the power developed under the 
plan proposed has been sold, instead of basing the control on the 
extreme low-water year, it will be found profitable to base control 
on an ordinary low-water year, and bear the risk of slight diminution 
in extreme years to gain tlie increased power and navigation benefits 
during all ordinary years. 

The division of cost and the “compensation to the Government for 
expenditures for navigation,” as above recommended, are believed 
to be free from any conflict with existing laws, principles, or vested 
rights and to be just and equitable to all parties concerned. The 
Government has not been presumed to be a commercial institution. 
It is provided that any earnings above those used on this river system 
be given to this section by providing for equitable sale of power due 
to Government investment for navigation. The natural water-power 
rights are taken to belong to the State, or to whomsoever the State has 
granted them. The Government expenditure is limited by the benefits 
received for navigation. The rental is based on value received. 

Provision for reservoirs insures all-year navigation on the lower 
river and makes the entire project feasible beyond question. The 
rental received will cover maintenance, operation, and betterments 
for the river system. These receipts could be made to support, and 
within a reasonable time retire, bonds for a large portion of the Gov¬ 
ernment expenditure should such method be desired. 

On the other side, the benefits to the power interests, as heretofore 
set forth, are very great; their initial expenditures are reduced to 
amounts justified by the power that can be readily sold, and they will 
eventually receive the benefits of the total development which would 
have cost them vastly greater sums. The physical coordination 
necessary for the proper development is secured by Government 
cooperation and the control for maximum benefits to navigation 
and power. It is thought that the provisions as to rental and equi¬ 
table sale of power due in part to Government expenditure should be 
acceptable to all parties concerned. Provision for the completion of 
the navigation works by the time the power is developed will allow 
economic location of power-using plants near the river where low 
rates are assured on raw material and finished products. This coor¬ 
dinate development will provide for the most economical utilization 
of many of the abundant natural resources of this section. 


58 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

All the foregoing overlapping benefits to navigation and power are 
the savings due to coordination or the carrying on of both develop¬ 
ments at the same time under the plan’ for expenditure proposed. 
Either interest proceeding alone means the failure to realize the bene¬ 
fits secured by the combined project, and any division of the initial 
expenditure whereby the Government expenditure is not the total 
navigation share will mean an initial loss to the power interests and 
an eventual loss to the United States. 

COMMERCE. 

In addition to the data submitted with the preliminary report there 
are submitted herewith certain pledges as to wharves, etc., and some 
data concerning the making of atmospheric nitrogen and pig iron and 
steel with electric furnaces. Since the preliminary report was sub¬ 
mitted a steel plant has been constructed at Gadsden, Ala., whose 
output, it is stated, will be about 500 tons per day. Motors aggre¬ 
gating about 12,000 horsepower are installed in this plant. Reference 
is made to letter of the manager of this company in Appendix K 
herewith. 

Pledges .—Table F gives the various wharves, railway connections 
therewith, boats, and barges pledged by various localities and per¬ 
sons, and also estimates as to freight. The various pledges are here¬ 
with as Appendix K, except in the case of Montgomery, where the 
wharf is completed according to the plans in the regular files of the 
War Department. It is believed that the estimates of this table are 
conservative, and with the opening of navigation will be found to be 
rather under than above the actual commerce of the river. The ful¬ 
fillment of these pledges, so far as they relate to cities or towns, to¬ 
gether with requirements for other towns, is recommended as con¬ 
ditions governing the availability of the expenditures from any appro¬ 
priation which may be made. 

Table F. 



Modern 

wharves. 

Steam 

ox- 

electric 

connec¬ 

tions. 

Boats. 

Barges. 

Freig 

Amount. 

ht per year ( 

Rate per 
ton. 

308 da] 

Dif¬ 

fer¬ 

ence. 

7B). 

Total 

saving. 1 

Rail. 

River 

Pledged by— 





Tons. 





Rome, Ga. 

1 

1 

2 

5 






Gadsden, Ala. 

1 

1 








Montgomery, Ala. 

2 1 

1 

( 3 ) 

(3) 






Brick Co., Ragland, Ala. 

1 

1 

1 

* 4 

46,200 

$2.00 

$1.00 

*1.00 

$46,200 

Coal Co., Ragland, Ala... 

1 

1 

1 

4 10 

616,000 

1.80 

1.00 

.80 

492,800 

Cement Co., Ragland, Ala. 

1 

1 

( 6 ) 

( 5 ) 

200,000 

2.00 

1.00 

1.00 

200,000 

Total. 





862,200 




739,000 

Definite estimates by— 








Steel Co., Gadsden, Ala... 





77,000 

2.50 

1.00 

1.50 

115,500 

Marble Co., Talladega 






County, Ala. 




5 6 5 

60,000 

2.60 

1 00 

1 60 

96 000 

Cotton Mill, Lindale, Ga. 7 





7,800 

8.00 

2.00 

6.00 

46,800 

Total tonnage and sav- 










ine in freight ner vear. 





1,007,000 




997,300 

1 









1 Based on Appendix H of preliminary examination report and estimated water rates. 

2 Plans for wharf approved by Secretary of War; wharf completed. 

8 Citizens’ boat and barge line organized at Montgomery; part of capital subscribed; one boat has been 
purchased. 

* Each 200 tons. 

6 If not operated by common carriers, to be operated by cement and marble companies, as per their letters. 

6 Each 500 tons. 

7 The number of cotton mills in this section is given in the preliminary report. 



















































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


59 


Atmospheric nitrogen .—The production of nitrogen from the 
atmosphere has passed from the experimental to the commercial 
basis. There is attached hereto, in Appendix K, a list of cyanamid 
plants as published by the Niagara Falls Co. These plants are in 
Germany, Norway, Italy, Switzerland, France, and Japan. It is 
reported in the technical press that recently one 250,000-horsepower 
plant using another method has been built in Norway. Some refer¬ 
ences from Daily Consular and Trade Reports concerning this item 
are also included in this appendix. The importance of these per¬ 
fected processes can scarcely be estimated. Their bearing on this 
particular project is that they offer a great field for some of the power 
developed and will increase the commerce on the river. 

There is also herewith, in Appendix K, a list of estimated con¬ 
sumption of fertilizers in some of the Southern States. The amount 
of fertilizer used in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana is 
estimated at 1,279,093.85 tons per year. This consumption will 
necessarily increase. It is noted that the demand for raw cotton 
from the South in 20 years from now is estimated at 26,000,000 bales, 
twice the present crop; the present normal increase will give but 
17,000,000 bales in 20 years. Of all the Appalachian water powers 
the Coosa-Tallapoosa system is farthest to the Southwest. 

Electric steel .—Electric furnaces have been constructed for the 
reduction of iron ore into pig iron. Electric furnaces have also been 
constructed for the making of steel from pig iron. There are electric 
steel plants in Europe and in the United States. In the discussion 
of some of these plants it is noted that the cost of production bids 
fair to make this method a competitor against cheap coal. Certain 
superior qualities are also claimed for the finished product. The 
tempering of steel by use of the electric bath is now also accomplished. 

The above developments are mentioned because they, in common 
with steel plants, cotton mills, and atmospheric nitrogen plants, will 
utilize water power and add to the commerce of the river. 

Government-aided railroads .—As bearing on the fact that the general 
direction of this river system is a logical direction for transportation 
lines, and that this fact has long been financially recognized by the 
General Government, there is attached hereto map No. 14, showing 
Government-aided railroads in the vicinity of this river system. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 

It is, in my opinion, practicable to construct reservoirs at the head¬ 
waters as above stated and estimated, and thus make possible, with 
very reasonable regulation, 6-foot navigation on the Alabama River. 
Nine-foot navigation can eventually be obtained by the necessary 
regulation when required. The power will be increased as above 
set forth. It is possible to coordinate the interests of navigation and 
water power development and the saving thereby will be over eight 
millions of dofiars. 

It is recommended that the plan adopted be the one set forth in 
Table E. This plan provides for 14 dams on the Coosa River be¬ 
tween Gadsden and Wetumpka, and for the Etowah Reservoir. 
The amount of the Government expenditure recommended at each 


t 


60 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA EIVEKS. 


site is shown separately for the locks and dams in Table E. The 
totals are as follows: 


For 8 low dams and all locks on Coosa River, 10 single locks, and 4 flights 


of 2 locks. $6, 990, 000 

For navigation share of 6 high dams on Coosa River. 4, 013, 000 

For Etowah Reservoir. 4, 000, 000 


Total.. 15,003,000 


The terms on which the power interests can carry on their share of 
the construction should be definitely specified. Terms that are 
considered equitable as to rental and as to sale of power have been 
stated on pages 50-52 of this report. 

As to the Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1, while no recommendation of 
specific amount is made pending some definite agreement with the 
power interests, it is recommended that when such agreement is 
concluded the expenditure, method of control, and rental be accord¬ 
ing to data above given. 

In order that the Coosa-Alabama River system may be utilized to 
its full value as a factor in the development of this section, and in 
order that the factories which will use electric power receive the 
greatest commercial advantages due to cheap transportation, it is, 
in my opinion, essential that all works necessary for opening the 
river for navigation shall be completed as early as the power instal¬ 
lations at the high dams. 

The estimate for the Etowah Reservoir is based on present value 
of flooded land. This proposed flooded area will be encroached on 
by towns and commercial plants which, for all economic reasons, 
might just as well be located beyond the flood limit. Reservoir 
sites of this type are rare. The construction of this reservoir is part 
of the most advantageous plan for the development of this river 
system, and it is recommended that in the interests of economy 
without reference to the time of construction provision be made for 
the acquisition of this site, at least in the vicinity of Acworth and 
Canton, Ga., as soon as possible. 

This locality is, in my opinion, worthy of improvement to the 
extent above recommended, and it is further recommended that 
the money appropriated be made available only when public wharves, 
warehouses, and freight-handling facilities and steam or electric 
railway connections therewith, as may be approved by the Secretary 
of War, shall have been constructed, or bond equal to their estimated 
cost shall have been made for such construction at Selma, Wetumpka, 
Riverside, Ragland, Gadsden, Ala., and Rome, Ga. 

Very respectfully, 


H. B. Ferguson, 
Captain, Corps of Engineers . 
The Chief of Engineers, United States Army 
(Through the Division Engineer). 







ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA LIVERS. 

[Third indorsement.] 


61 


Office Division Engineer, Gulf Division, 

New Orleans, La., December 29, 1910. 

1. Respectfully forwarded to the Chief of Engineers, United States 
Army. 

2. The report of the district officer shows a thorough and careful 
study of the question and presents the various aspects of the case 
quite fully. The conclusions with regard to storage discharge and 
the effect upon the lower reaches of the river are probably as accu¬ 
rate as can be made in advance, but natural streams are quite differ¬ 
ent from artificial channels and each forms to a certain extent a rule 
to itself on account of the manner in which the waterway widens 
and the spacing and character of effluent streams. The amount of 
discharge necessary to produce a given effect upon the lower river 
will have, therefore, to he a matter of experience and can probably 
not be determined definitely in advance. The difference between 
theory and practice will, however, not be sufficient to materially 
affect the conclusions drawn. 

3. The rates of rental for water power have been carefully con¬ 
sidered and are regarded as being as equitable as any which can be 
laid down at this time. Economic conditions and also conditions of 
operation upon the rivers are likely to change or vary somewhat 
with the progress of the work and the commercial development of 
the region. On this account it is not believed advisable to attempt 
to fix the rates too far in advance. Probably 10-year intervals 
would be sufficient. As, however, parties using water power must 
have comparatively definite data in order to enable them to intelli¬ 
gently invest their capital, the rates could be made definitely for a 
fixed amount for a 10-year period with statement that it would not 
vary more than a certain per cent, or beyond certain limits, during 
a further period that might be determined. As the Engineer officer 
in charge of the district is changed from time to time and as indi¬ 
vidual officers would probably hold different ideas upon the subject, 
and as it is desirable to avoid changes in rates due to individual 
opinions, it might perhaps be advisable to assign the matter of regu¬ 
lation of rates to a board of three officers most conversant with the 
improvement and local conditions. 

4. The engineering features of the project have been carefully 
worked out and the conclusions appear to be sound and, subject to 
the slight modification as to determination of rental values above 
indicated, the report is concurred in. 

Lansing H. Beach, 

Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers, 

Division Engineer. 

[For Report of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors on 
survey, see pages 3-7.] 


62 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVERS. 


Appendix I. 

Table No. 4. —Etowah Reservoir—Available storage—Annual run-off at gauge stations 

above Riverside , Ala. 

(In second-feet, totals, and per square mile. From U. S. Geological Survey records. Computed figures 

are in parenthesis.] 



Coosa River. 

Oostanaula-Coosa- 
wattee Rivers. 

Etowah River. 

River¬ 

side. 

Rome. 

Resaca. 

Carters. 

Rome. 

Canton. 

Ball 

Ground. 

Proposed 

reservoir 

dam. 

Drainage area (square 
miles). 

1897 . 

1898 . 

7,065 
/ 9,282 

\ 1.31 

/ 9,329 

\ 1.32 

/ 12,189 
\ 1.73 

1 14,623 
\ 2.07 

/ 16,092 

1 2.28 

/ 12,285 
\ 1.74 

/ 14,849 
\ 2.10 
/ 4,945 

\ 0.70 

/ 10,900 
\ 1.54 

/ 15,600 
\ 2.21 
/ 11,200 
\ 1.59 

I 11,300 
\ 1.60 

4,006 
6,070 

1.52 

6,111 

1.52 
7,906 

1.97 

8,218 

2. 05 
10,103 

2.52 
6,920 

1.73 

8,932 

2.23 

1,614 

2,844 

1.76 

2,838 

1.76 

531 
891 
1.67 
938 
1.76 
1,185 
2. 23 

1,800 

604 
1,134 

1.87 
1,337 
2.21 
1,721 
2. 85 
1,700 
2.81 
1,938 
3.21 
1,454 
2.41 
1,782 
2. 96 

605 
1.00 

« 

396 

1,023 

1899. 









1900. 







1,777 
3.35 
1,111 
2. 09 
1,337 
2.52 
539 
1.01 
1,043 
1.97 
1,650 
3.12 
1,170 
2.21 
1,090 
2 . 06 




1901. 









1902. 









1903. 









1904. 







2,645 
1.64 
4,600 
2.86 
2,940 
1.82 
2,810 
1.74 

2,670 
1.48 
4,560 
2. 53 
2,820 
1.56 
2,850 
1.58 



1905. 









1906. 









1907. 







1,091 

2. 76 


lyuo.. 

Mean. 




( 1 . 68 ) 

(1.82) 

(1.82) 


(1.82) 

(2. 52) 


(2.23) 


Mean annual run-off at dam site, 2,280 second-feet, equals 69,000,000,000 cubic feet. 

Run-off, 1903, 2,563 second-feet, equals 77,000,000,000 cubic feet. 

Table No. 5 .—Etowah reservoir—Available storage—Annual rainfall, run-off, and 

losses, Alabama River Basin and adjacent. 

[Compiled and computed from reports of U. S. Geological Survey and Weather Bureau.] 

COOSAWATTEE RIVER ABOVE CARTERS, GA. 

[Drainage area, 531 square miles.] 


Year. 

Rainfall. 

Run-off. 

Loss. 

■Percentage 

loss. 

1897. 

Inches. 
55.40 
59.97 
54. 73 
65.03 
71.52 
47. 24 
56.29 
43.66 
64.13 
67. 85 
54.08 

Inches. 

28.44 
28.80 
32. 88 
33.36 
54.48 
34. 20 
40.80 
17. 40 
26. 76 
51.12 
37.68 

Inches. 

26.96 
31.17 
21.85 
31.67 
17.04 
13.04 
15.49 
26.26 
37.37 
16. 73 
16.40 

0.49 
.52 
.40 
.49 
.24 
.29 
.26 
.60 
.58 
.24 
.30 

1898. 

1899.. 

1900. 

1901. 

1902. 

1903. 

1904. 

1905. 

1906. 

1907. 

Average. 

58.17 

35.08 

60.31 



Per cent. 



1897-1902. 






141.73 
130. 26 
125.35 
140.87 
125.93 
125.29 

.45 

.37 

.38 

.41 

.38 

.37 

1898-1903. 



1899-1904. 



1900-1905. 



1901-1906. 



1902-1907. 

















































































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS 


63 


Table No. 5. —Etowah reservoir■—Available storage*—Annual rainfall, run-off, and 
losses, Alabama River Basin and acfy’acenf—Continued. 

COOSA RIVER ABOVE ROME, GA. 

[Drainage area, 4,00(3 square miles.] 


Year. 

Rainfall. 

Run-off. 

Loss. 

Percentage 

loss. 

1897. 

Inches. 
49.47 
55.50 
50.59 
59.75 
64.80 
45.90 
52.63 
41.01 
56. 23 
61.09 
49.32 

Inches. 
21.24 
21.60 
26. 28 
25.92 
34.08 
22.80 
29.40 

Inches. 

28.23 
33.90 
24.31 
33.83 
30.72 
23.10 

23.23 

0.57 

.61 

.48 

.56 

.47 

.50 

.44 

1898. 

1899. 

1900. 

1901.;. 

1902. 

1903. 

1904. 

1905. 




1906. 




1907. 




1897-1902.;. 






174.09 
169.09 

.53 

.51 

1898-1903. 







COOSA RIVER AT RIVERSIDE, ALA. 
[Drainage area, 7,065 square miles.] 


1897 . 

40.32 

17.52 

22.80 

0.56 

1898 . 

53.87 

17.04 

36.83 

.68 

1899 . 

51.50 

21.96 

29.54 

.57 

1900 . 

61.89 

26.40 

35.49 

.57 

1901 . 

63.22 

28.92 

34.30 

.54 

1902 . 

46.88 

22.32 

24.56 

.53 

1903 . 

51.52 

24.00 

27.52 

.53 

1904 . 

39.31 

8.16 

31.15 

.79 

1905 .. 

54.64 

19.80 

34.84 

.64 

1906 . 

61.32 

27.72 

33.60 


1907 . 

50.43 

20.28 

30.15 

.60 




1897-1902 . 



183.52 

.57 

1898 1903 . 



188.24 

.57 

1899 1904 . 



182.56 

.59 

1900 1905 . 



187.86 

.60 

1901 1906 . 



185.97 

.60 

1902 1907 . 



181.82 

.61 






TALLAPOOSA RIVER ABOVE MILSTEAD. 
[Drainage area, 3,620 square miles.] 


1898 

1899 

1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 



51.27 

14.40 

36.87 

0.72 


48.22 

19.44 

28.78 

.60 


64.85 

23.04 

41.81 

.65 


59.17 

24.48 

34.69 

.59 


55.69 

19.68 

36.01 

.65 


50.83 

24.96 

25.87 

.51 


41.54 

9.60 

31.94 

.77 


50.30 

13.92 

36.38 

.72 


56.36 

23.04 

33.32 

.59 


51.23 

21.12 

30.11 

.59 

_i our? . 



204.03 

.62 

i qru . 



199.10 

.63 

1Q0S . 



206.70 

.65 

iqnfi . 



198.21 

.64 

1 QH7 . 



193.63 

.64 







TALLAPOOSA RIVER ABOVE STURDEVANT. 
[Drainage area, 2,334 square miles.] 



56.78 

27.00 

29.78 

0.52 


51.15 

22.80 

28.35 

.55 


50.58 

28.20 

22.38 

.44 


36.50 

10.92 

25.58 

.70 


50.00 

17.64 

32.36 

.65 


56.38 

31.44 

24.84 

.44 



— 














































































































64 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

Table No. 5 .—Etowah reservoir—Available storage—Annual rainfall, run-off, and 
losses, Alabama River Basin and adjacent- Continued. 

ALABAMA AND COOSA RIVERS AT SELMA, ALA. 

[Drainage area, 15,400 square miles.] 


Year. 

Rainfall. 

Run-off. 

Loss. 

Percentage 

loss. 


Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 



44.79 

17.04 

27.75 

0.62 


50.07 

15.24 

34.83 

.69 


48. 80 

22.32 

26.48 

.54 


64.08 

27.00 

37.08 

.58 


59.70 

29.64 

30.06 

.54 


49.49 

24.96 

24.53 

.50 


51.81 

25.32 

26.49 

.51 


38.99 

9.96 

29.03 

.75 


53.09 

18.48 

34.51 

.65 


59.74 

27.48 

32.26 

.54 


52.44 

22.32 

30.12 

.58 

• 

1897 1902 . 



180. 73 

.58 

1893 1903 . 



179.47 

.56 

1899 1904 .. 



173.67 

.57 

1900 1905 . 



181. 70 

.59 

1901 1906 . 



176.88 

.58 

1902 1907 . 



176.94 

.59 







FLINT RIVER ABOVE ALBANY, GA. 
[Drainage area, 5,000 square miles.] 


1897 . 

45.33 

20.52 

24.81 

0.55 

1898 . 

57.18 

17.04 

40.14 

.70 

1899 . 

42.81 

18.12 

24.69 

.58 

1900 . 

55.74 

20.64 

35.10 

.63 

1901 . 

58.53 

26.64 

31.89 

.55 

1902 . 

50.47 

20.28 

30.19 

.60 

1903 . 

56.77 

24.60 

32.17 

.57 

1904 . 

37.19 

14.04 

23.15 

.62 

1905 . 

50. 47 

16.08 

34.39 

.68 

1906 . 

50.26 

20.40 

29.86 

.59 

1907 . 

52. 75 

20.40 

32.35 

.61 


1897-1902. 



186.82 

.60 

.60 

1898-1903. 



194.18 

1899-1904. 



177.19 

.59 

1900-1905. 



186.89 

.61 

1901-1906. 



181.65 

.60 

1902-1907. 



182.11 

.61 





CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER ABOVE WEST POINT, GA. 
[Drainage area, 3,300 square miles.] 


1897 . 

1898 . 

1899 . 

1900 . 

1901 . 

1902 . 

1903 . 

1904 . 

1905 . 

1906 . 

1907 . 

1897-1902. 

47.11 

57.15 
46.68 
63.04 
65.65 
49.44 
53.60 
31.90 
50.19 

59.16 
46. 73 

18.60 
19.68 
21.84 
29.88 

31.32 
24.96 

28.32 
11.76 
16.20 
28.80 
19.92 

28.51 

37.47 
24.84 
33.16 
34.33 

24.48 
25.28 
20.14 
33.99 
30.36 
26.81 

0.61 

.65 

.53 

.53 

.51 

.50 

.47 

.66 

.68 

.51 

.58 



182 79 

55 

1898-1903. 



179 56 

53 

1899-1904. 



162 23 

53 

1900-1905. 



171 38 

56 

1901-1906. 



168 58 

55 

1902-1907. 



161.06 

.57 



































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 65 

Table No. 5a.— Annual rainfall , Alabama River Basin and adjacent , 1856-1904. 


Year. 

Inches. 

Year. 

Inches. 



49 .88 


55.71 

1856. 


46. 49 

1881 

53 91 



50. 63 


48. 29 



54.11 


52. 40 



46.34 


55. 74 

1860. 


45.61 

37.81 

1885 

55.98 
47 94 



55. 79 


56.30 



48. 27 


44.26 



50.09 


45.35 

1865. 


51.72 


52.06 



39.95 

1890. 

58. 45 



53.16 


48.41 



45.58 


44.16 



56.98 


48.43 

1870. 


52. 44 


39. 44 



48. 87 

1895. 

44.42 



55.93 


47.43 



55.04 


46. 38 



46. 25 


63.81 

1875. 


53.04 


55.85 



45.18 

1900. 

49.24 



49.87 


50.67 

1880. 

59.20 


36.62 


The above table is condensed from compilation made by Mr. Henry C. Jones, of 
Montgomery, Ala. Mr. Jones kindly loaned this office the original compilation which 
gives the rainfall by months. 

The method of arriving at total annual rainfall is by taking the average for all sta¬ 
tions where records were obtained. In Table No. 5 and in Table No. 1 of the pre¬ 
liminary reports the total annual rainfall was obtained by allowing a certain weight 
for record at each station, depending on area of watershed that was considered affected. 

Table No. 6 .— Etowah Reservoir—Effective storage, 

EVAPORATION ON RESERVOIR. 



Inches. 

Billion 

cubic 

feet. 

1903. 

Rainfall, August-December. 

10.0 

5.0 

18.0 

13.0 


Less 50 per cent run-off already counted. 


Evaporation on raservoir ( Augusta, fla., records)... 


Net evaporation. 


40 square miles, at. 13 inches.. 

1.2 

1904. 

"Rainfall. .Tnne-T)eoemhar . 

22.0 

11.0 

30.4 

19.4 

T.ess 60 Tier cent. ..... 


JTT7tir»nr d tion on rpsp.rvoir ( Anmista. Ga.. TPOOrds)...... 


"Net. evanoration . 


3(1 sonare miles, at. 20 inches.......................... 

1.4 




H. Doc. 253, 63-1-5 






























































66 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table No. 6. — Etowah Reservoir—Effective storage —Continued. 
STORAGE ACCOUNT THROUGH CRITICAL PERIOD, 1903-4-5. 


[Reservoir capacity, 40,000,000,000 cubic feet.] 


1903. 


Tull, July. 

Draw-off, August-December. 

Evaporation loss on reservoir, August-December 
Loss in control, about 10 per cent. 


1904. 

Caught, January, February, March, April. 

Praw-off, effective, 1904. 

Caught in August and December. 

Evaporation loss on reservoir, June-December. 

'increased evaporation on river, 15 square miles, at 20 inches.... 

Error in control, about 10 per cent. 

Difference of phase of shortage at Riverside and at Montgomery 

1905. 

Caught during year. 


Billion cubic feet. 


Minus. 

Plus. 

In reser¬ 
voir. 



42.0 

10.0 


32.0 

1.2 


30.8 

0.9 


29.9 


9.1 

39.0 

30.0 


9.0 


4.4 

13.4 

1.4 


12.0 

0.7 

. 

11.3 

3.6 


7.7 

7.7 


0.0 


42.0 

42.0 


Total effective storage for 1904 is 37.7 billion cubic feet if regulated for navigation 
alone, or 30,000,000,000 cubic feet if regulated for navigation and power. Effect 
of this storage is seen on curve for 1904 on drawings Nos. 6 and 7. 


Table No. 7. —Estimated monthly discharge of Coosa River at Riverside , Ala. 

[Drainage area, 7,065 square miles.] 

[From Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers of the United States Geological Survey.] 


Month. 

Discharge in second-feet. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

1897. 




January. 

21,707 

2,420 

8 ,434 

February. 

27,086 

4,520 

18,658 

March. 

47,624 

10,460 

32,481 

April. 

37,355 

5,100 

17,698 

May. 

10,786 

4,270 

7,040 

June. 

4,950 

3,070 

3,915 

July. 

23,826 

3,070 

7,142 

August._.,_ 

6,300 

2,850 

3,870 

September. 

3,540 

1,440 

1,350 

1,976 

October. 

3,660 

1,819 

November. 

2,525 

1,570 

1,786 

December. 

13,883 

1,820 

6,566 

The year. 

47,624 

1,350 

9,282 

1898. 




Januarv. 

35,084 

3,550 

11,572 

-February. 

16,760 

3,655 

5,763 

March. 

15,045 

3,550 

5,852 

April. 

36,160 

8,260 

18,133 

May. 

9,560 

3,028 

4,684 

June. 

5,540 

2,320 

3,281 

July. 

9,900 

2,140 

4,289 

August. 

19,161 

3,970 

8,758 

September. 

41,920 

3,865 

13,927 

October. 

72,160 

3,760 

19,936 

November. 

20,190 

5,300 

8,375 

December. 

9,900 

5,070 

7,376 

The year. 

72,160 

2,140 

9,329 


Discharge in second-feet. 


IVAUIllLI. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

1899. 

January. 

17,330 

6,390 

10,865 

February. 

48,410 

17,330 

30,974 

March. 

60,880 

14,740 

38,094 

April. 

41,010 

11,410 

24,915 

May. 

14,000 

4,900 

7,742 

June. 

7,700 

3,500 

4,771 

July. 

14, 740 

2,760 

5,318 

August. 

10,125 

2,600 

3,806 

September. 

6,530 

2,330 

3,555 

October. 

3,100 

2,330 

2,510 

November. 

7,100 

2,395 

3,086 

December. 

26,025 

2,920 

10,631 

The year. 

60,880 

2,330 

12,189 

1900. 

January. 

33,100 

/ 

4,280 

13,344 

February. 

54,300 

5,700 

23,487 

March. 

44,500 

13,450 

26,822 

April.' 

65,500 

11,350 

29,813 

May. 

14,850 

5,970 

8,198 

June. 

51.500 

39.500 

5,970 

22,216 

July. 

5,565 

13,610 

August. 

12,750 

4,050 

5,147 

September. 

23,100 

2,760 

6,483 

October. 

23,100 

3,100 

6,910 

November. 

29,900 

3,720 

7,673 

December. 

22,300 

5,835 

11,773 

The year. 

65,500 

2,760 

14,623 





























































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 67 

Table No. 7 . Estimated monthly discharge of Coosa River at Riverside, Ala. —Continued. 


Month. 


1901. 

January....... 

February. 

Jdarch. .*. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August. 

September. 

October. 

November. 

December. 

The year. 

1902. 

January. 

February. 

March. 

April. 

May.... 

June.... 

July. 

August. 

September. 

October. 

November. 

December. 

The year. 

1903. 

January. 

February. 

March. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August. 

September. 

October. 

November. 

December. 

The year. 

1904. 

January. 

February. 

March. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August. 

September. 

October. 

November. 

December. 

The year. 


Discharge in second-feet. 

Month. 

Discharge in second-feet. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

55,900 

8,970 

26,089 

1905. 

January. 

43,650 

5,028 

14,500 

•il, iuu 
56,700 

8,970 

21,784 

February. 

50,310 

6,250 

30,340 

7,400 

20, 613 

March. 

20,340 

7,440 

11,710 

51,100 

14,500 

30,616 

April. 

May. 

9,080 

5 ,970 

7; 266 

40, 700 

6,670 

16,195 

34,400 

6,110 

14,650 

26,100 

6,810 

12,335 

June. 

10,130 

4,380 

6,259 

10, 300 

4,900 

6,535 

July. 

18,860 

3,655 

1 , 990 

44,700 

4,400 

5,700 

20,370 

August. 

14,800 

3,112 

6,813 

23,100 

9,977 

September. 

5,028 

2,255 

3,203 

10,300 

4,280 

5,694 

October. 

7,440 

2,255 

3,921 

4,650 

3,830 

4,016 

November. 

3,215 

2,528 

2,838 

57,100 

4,050 

18,885 

December. 

35,880 

3,215 

21,330 

57,100 

3,830 

16,092 

The year. 

50,310 

2,255 

10,900 

55,900 

6,670 

23,804 

1906. 

January. 

42,200 

11,700 

22,600 

51,500 

12,050 

24,839 

February. 

16,000 

5, 700 

8,530 

62,300 

14,850 

34, 762 

March.-.. 

75,800 

6,540 

34,400 

55,100 

8,330 

20,872 

April. 

37,500 

7,140 

14,800 

8,330 

4,900 

6,375 

May. 

11,000 

4,640 

6,850 

4,900 

3,830 

4,247 

June. 

31,900 

4,380 

10,100 

6,670 

3,015 

3,718 

July. 

46,400 

5,030 

17,600 

5,430 

2, 760 

3,577 

August. 

17,500 

7,440 

11,200 

10,300 

2,610 

3,938 

September. 

15,300 

5,560 

10,500 

10,300 

2, 760 

4,576 

October. 

44, 700 

6,980 

20,400 

9,950 

2,685 

3,994 

November. 

46,400 

5,160 

17,700 

24,300 

5,430 

12,719 

December. 

31,900 

7,290 

12, 300 

62,300 

2,610 

12,285 

The year. 

75,800 

4,380 

15,600 

21,710 

6,610 

12,066 

1907. 

January. 

45,100 

7,750 

15,700 

67,500 

10,680 

43,155 

February. 

40,400 

8,700 

19,600 

58,470 

17,930 

40,682 

March. 

51,100 

7,440 

19,700 

52,450 

12,370 

28,983 

April. 

18,300 

7,440 

10,600 

30, 740 

6,460 

11,294 

May. 

38,300 

9,660 

15,900 

36,540 

6,460 

15,654 

J une. 

29,000 

9,020 

5,290 

10,800 

21,710 

5,010 

7,994 

July. 

4,130 

5,980 

14,890 

3,180 

5,910 

August. 

7,140 

3,320 

5,300 

4,880 

2,800 

3,211 

September. 

21,800 

2,620 

6,400 

3,590 

2,620 

2,922 

October. 

10,300 

2,810 

4,090 

4,510 

2,800 

3,334 

November. 

31,100 

3,010 

9,420 

3,380 

2,710 

2,983 

December. 

27,300 

5,420 

11,500 

67,500 

2,620 

14,849 

The year. 

51,100 

2,620 

11,200 

14,440 

2,620 

5,228 

1908. 

January. 

35,800 

8,220 

18,000 

17,940 

4,130 

8,391 

February. 

53,700 

15,300 

30,300 

20,900 

14,800 

5,560 

11,370 

March. 

47,700 

9,980 

20,300 

4,765 

7,462 

April. 

26,900 

8,380 

15,900 

5,970 

2,527 

3,676 

May. 

14,500 

6,690 

10,300 

7,135 

2,255 

3,598 

June. 

9,340 

4,130 

5,960 

5,970 

2, 435 

3,314 

July. 

11,700 

3,110 

4,930 

18,680 

2,527 

6,118 

August. 

9,340 

2,910 

4,920 

2,620 

1,528 

1,987 

1,351 

September..... 

10,600 

2,260 

3,650 

1,605 

1,225 

October. 

6,980 

2,080 

2,800 

1,920 

1,225 

1,713 

November. 

3,660 

2,340 

2,750 

14,800 

1,760 

5,127 

December. 

41,700 

2,720 

15,500 

20,900 

1,225 

4,945 

The year. 

53,700 

2,080 

11,300 


Table No. 8.— Etowah Reservoir. 
[Reservoir capacity and cost.] 


Height of 
dam (spill¬ 
way height, 
in feet). 

Flooded 

land 

(square 

miles). 

Storage 
capacity 
(million cu¬ 
bic feet). 

Total cost. 

Cost per 
million cu¬ 
bic feet. 

40 

» 0.43 

(0 

0.434 



64 

1.04 



84 

104 

2.44 

1.318 



6.38 

3.607 



124 

12.55 

8.793 



144 

20.27 

17.743 



164 

174 

31.76 

41.07 

31.920 

42.020 

$3,260,000 

4,000,000 

$102.13 

95.20 


i Limit of draw-off. 


































































































































































































68 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table No. 9. —Estimated monthly discharge of Tallapoosa River at Sturdevant. 


[Drainage area, 2,334 square miles.] 

[From Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers of the U. S. Geological Survey.] 


Month. 

Discharge in second-feet. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

1901. 




January. 

20,345 

4,690 

7,035 

February. 

18,485 

4,535 

6, 468 
5,315 

March. 

12,285 

3,450 

April. 

12,440 

4,535 

6,772 

Mav. 

10,270 

3,140 

4,885 

June. 

7,170 

2,365 

4,452 

2,795 

July. 

5,155 

1,640 

August. 

16,625 

1,640 

4, 793 
2,852 

September. 

9,340 

1,640 

October. 

7,790 

1,220 

1,946 

November. 

2,055 

1,220 

1,502 

December. 

24,150 

1,310 

4,670 

The year. 

24,150 

1,220 

4,457 

1902. 




January. 

15,695 

2,520 

4,550 

Februarv. 

23,245 

3, 760 

6,288 

March. 

23,245 

5,310 

9,708 

April. 

10,890 

3,914 

5,677 

May. 

5,000 

1,910 

3,240 

June. 

4,070 

840 

1,544 

July. 

2,830 

660 

1,004 

August. 

7, 790 

470 

1,298 

1,255 

September. 

4,845 

510 

October. 

2,985 

715 

1,180 

November. 

6,550 

660 

2,011 

December. 

10,890 

1,640 

4,412 

The year. 

23,245 

470 

3,514 

1903. 




January. 

4,120 
27,370 

2,320 

3,128 

Februarv. 

2,470 

9,841 

March. 

15,070 

5,320 

8,035 

April. 

14,470 

4,420 

6,988 

May. 

19,120 

3,370 

5,688 

June. 

10, 720 

2, 770 

4,845 

July. 

7,270 

1,500 

3,204 

August. 

6,970 

1,110 

2, 771 

September. 

3,370 

765 

1,271 | 

October. 

2,620 

765 

939 

November. 

1,750 

912 

1,285 

December. 

2,920 

1,036 

1,410 

The year. 

27,370 

765 

4,117 

1904. 




January. 

7, 760 

1,264 

2,500 

February. 

8,860 

2,230 

4,089 

March. 

6,490 

1,757 

2, 749 

April. 

3,410 

1,352 

1,757 

May. 

2,495 

558 

991 

June. 

5,330 

377 

1,084 

July. 

2, 780 

418 

1,086 

August. 

34,200 

1,105 

5,855 
850 

September. 

2,230 

509 

October. 

509 

250 

314 

November. 

1,545 

6,250 

275 

722 

December. 

717 

1,562 

The year. 

34,200 

250 

1,966 


Month. 

Discharge in second-feet. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

1905. 

Januarv. 

40,510 

1,100 

4,977 

February. 

20,350 

1,850 

6,897 

March. 

10,560 

2,440 

3,647 

April. 

4,250 

2,040 

2,694 
2,744 

May. 

4,450 

1,460 

June.. 

2, 730 

885 

1,459 

Julv. 

4,660 

710 

1,540 

August. 

13,950 

554 

2,754 

September. 

1,790 

296 

677 

October. 

1,910 

416 

929 

November. 

1,460 

656 

889 

December. 

22,910 

950 

7,411 

The year. 

40,510 

296 

3,052 

1906. 

January. 

29,600 

2,730 

6,770 

February. 

4,060 

2,370 

3,020 

March. 

59,100 

2,440 

12,700 

April. 

7,800 

2, 660 

4,010 

Mav. 

11,400 

1,910 

3,160 

June. 

16,500 

1,460 

3,230 

Julv. 

17,200 

1,460 

6,140 

August. 

20,000 

2,440 

5,310 

September. 

19,100 

2,300 

5,540 

October. 

20,000 

2,300 

6,140 

November. 

20, 700 

2,170 

4,000 

December. 

21,000 

2,440 

4,660 

The year. 

59,100 

1,460 

5,390 

1907. 



4,940 

January. 

22,000 

3,040 

Februarv. 

27,100 

3,430 

8,030 

March. 

24,500 

3,040 

6,280 

April. 

12,700 

2,600 

5,600 

May. 

21,000 

3,600 

6,810 

June. 

5,550 

1,960 

3,110 

July. 

4,320 

1,270 

2,300 

August. 

4,130 

915 

1,660 

September. 

4,420 

635 

1,270 

October. 

2,020 

690 

912 

November. 

15,600 

750 

3,140 

December. 

14,000 

1,720 

4,840 

The year. 

27,100 

635 

4,070 

1908. 

January. 

11,700 

2,600 

4,510 

February. 

33,200 

4,130 

9,900 

March. 

20, 700 

3,040 

5,340 

April. 

16,200 
7,020 

2,740 

5,310 

May. 

2,600 

3,990 

June. 

3,950 

1,270 

2,220 

Julv. 

3,770 

1,100 

1,790 

August. 

4,710 

750 

1,800 

September. 

5,120 

530 

1,080 

October. 

1,510 

505 

715 

November. 

6,010 

880 

1,370 

December. 

12,000 

985 

2,690 

The year. 

33,200 

505 

3,390 
























































































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 69 

Table No. 10. —Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1, Cherokee Bluff—Storage account. 

[Discharge is from United States Geological Survey records at Sturdevant multiplied by 1|; Sturdevant 
drainage area is 2,334 square miles; reservoir dam drainage area is 2,848 square miles.] 


Second-feet. 


Month. 


1903. 
January... 
February.. 

March. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August.... 
September. 
October... 
November. 
December. 

1904. 
January... 
February.. 

March. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August_ 

September. 
October 
November. 
December.. 

1905. 
January.... 
February... 

March.. 

April.. 

May.. 

June. 

July. 

August. 

September. 
October 
November.. 
December.. 


Discharge. 

Surplus 

above 

3,000. 

Shortage 

below 

3,000. 

Amount 
required in 
reservoir. 

3,519 

519 



11,071 

8,071 



9,039 

6'039 



7; 861 

A, 861 


4,546 

6,399 

3,399 


9,407 

5,451 

2,451 


12,806 

3,605 

605 


15, 257 

3,117 

117 


15,862 

1,430 


1,570 

15,979 

1,056 


1,944 

14,389 

1,446 


1,554 

12,445 

1,586 


1,414 

10,891 

2,813 


187 

9,477 

4,600 

1,600 


9,290 

3,093 

93 


10,890 

1,997 


1,003 

10,983 

1,115 


1,885 

9,980 

1,220 


1,780 

8,095 

1,222 


1,778 

6,315 

6,587 

3,587 


4,537 

956 


2,044 

8,124 

353 


2,647 

6,078 

812 


2,188 

3,431 

1,757 


1,243 

1,243 

5,599 

2,599 



7,759 

A, 759 


2,599 

4,103 

1,103 


7,358 

3,031 

31 


8,461 

3,067 

87 


8, 492 

1,641 


1,359 

8,579 

1,733 


1,267 

7,220 

3,098 

98 


5,953 

762 


2,238 

6,051 

1,045 


1,955 

3,813 

1,000 


2,000 

1,858 

8,337 

5,337 




Surplus 

above 

2,500. 

Shortage 

below 

2,500. 

Amount 
required in 
reservoir. 

1,019 



8,571 



6,539 



5,361 



3,899 



2,951 


3,284 

1,105 


6,235 

617 


7,340 


1,070 

7,957 


1,444 

6,887 


1,054 

5,443 


914 

4,389 

313 


3,475 

2,100 


3,788 

593 


5,888 


503 

6,481 


1,385 

5,978 


1,280 

4,593 


1,278 

3,313 

4,087 


2,035 


1,544 

6,122 


2,147 

4,578 


1,688 

2,431 


743 

743 

3,099 



5,259 


3,099 

1,603 


8,358 

531 


9,961 

587 


10,492 


859 

11,079 


767 

10,220 

598 


9,453 


1,738 

7,713 


1,455 

6,258 


1,500 

4,758 

5,837 

* 





15.979 X 2.625= 42,000,000,000 cubic feet effective storage required to hold flowage on Tallapoosa River 
at 3,000 second-feet. 

7.957 X 2.625= 20,000,000,000 cubic feet effective storage required to hold flowage on Tallapoosa River at 
2,500 second-feet. 

Table No. 11. — Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1, Cherokee Bluff. 


[Reservoir capacity and cost.] 


Height of 
dam 

(spillway 
height, 
in feet). 

Flooded 

land 

(square 

miles). 

Storage 
capacity 
(million 
cubic feet). 

Total cost. 

Cost per 
million 
cubic feet. 

40 

1.17 

(i) 



60 

5. 43 

1.840 



80 

11. 59 

6.590 



90 

15.86 

10.000 



100 

20.12 

15.430 

81,086,000 

870.06 

120 

30.75 

29.610 

1,480,000 

49.98 

140 

44.34 

50.540 

2,040,000 

40.36 

160 

60.35 

79.480 

2,860,000 

35.98 

180 

78.21 

117.990 

3,980,000 

33.73 

190 

88.17 

141.180 

4,630,000 

32.80 


1 Limit of draw-off 





















































































































































70 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Storage required to hold flow at 4,200 second-feet (mean annual discharge) for 
period of 1903, 1904, and 1905, 131,000,000,000 cubic feet (190-90). 

Survey of 1909 extended to 160-foot dam. Storage above this height is from United 
States Geological Survey map. 


Table No. 12. — Tallapoosa Reservoir site No. 1. 

Capacity of reservoir required to hold flowage at reservoir Dam No. l,as shown through critical period 

1903, 1904, and 1905. 


Flowage at reservoir dam (second-feet). 


1,000 

1,100 

1,200 

1.300 

1.400 

1.500 

1,600 

1.700 
1,800 

1.900 
2,000 
2,100 
2,200 

2.300 

2.400 

2.500 

2,600 

2.700 
2,800 

2.900 
3,000 
3,100 
3,200 

3.300 

3.400 

3.500 

3,600 


Billion cubic feet. 


Effective 
storage re¬ 
quired. 

Addition 
per 100 sec¬ 
ond-feet. 

Evapora¬ 
tion on res¬ 
ervoir. 

Total ca¬ 
pacity of 
reservoir 
required. 

2.1 

0.7 

2 

4.1 

2.8 

.8 

2 

4.8 

3.6 

.8 

2 

5.6 

4.4 

.8 

2 

6.4 

5.2 

.8 

2 

7.2 

6 

.8 

2 

8 

6.8 

.8 

2 

8.8 

7.6 

1 

2 

9.6 

8.6 

1.04 

2 

10.6 

9.7 

1.04 

2 

11.7 

10.7 

1.04 

2 

12.7 

11.8 

1.04 

2 

13.8 

12.8 

1.04 

3.5 

16.3 

13.8 

1.04 

3.5 

17.3 

16.5 

2.7 

4 

20.5 

20.7 

4.2 

4 

24.7 

24.8 

4.1 

4 

28.8 

29 

4.2 

4 

33 

33.2 

4.2 

5 

38.2 

37.4 

4.2 

5 

42.4 

43.6 

6.2 

5 

48.6 

4*9. 8 

6.2 

5 

54.8 

56 

6.2 

5 

61 

62.8 

6.8 

5 

67.8 

69.6 

6.8 

5 

74.6 

76.4 

6.8 

5 

81.4 

83.2 

6.8 

5 

88.2 


The above table was obtained in the same manner as the preceding table, by using 
each assumed constant amount of flowage, or it could be obtained from drawing No. 
11. The evaporation was computed as previously stated for the Etowah Reservoir, 
account being taken of the rainfall on the reservoir. 


Table No. 13. — Tallapoosa Reservoir site No. 1. 

[Capacity of reservoir required for navigation alone to hold flowage at Montgomery, as shown through 

critical period 1903, 1904, and 1905.] 

TALLAPOOSA RESERVOIR NO. 1 ACTING ALONE. 


Flowage at 
Montgom¬ 
ery (sec¬ 
ond-feet). 

Billion cubic feet. 

Effective 

storage 

required. 

Addition 
per 500 
second-feet. 

Evapora¬ 
tion on 
reservoir 
+ 5 percent 
loss due to 
control. 

Total 

capacity of 
reservoir. 

2,500 

1.1 

2.6 

2.0 

3.1 

3,000 

3.7 

3.1 

2.2 

5.9 

3,500 

6.8 

3.5 

2.3 

9.1 

4,000 

10.3 

3.6 

2.5 

12.8 

4,500 

13.9 

3.8 

4.2 

18.1 

5,000 

17.7 

4.1 

4.9 

22.6 

5,500 

21.8 

4.5 

5.1 

26.9 






















































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS 

Table No. 13.— Tallapoosa Reservoir site No. 1 —Continued. 
TALLAPOOSA RESERVOIR NO. 1 ACTING ALONE—Continued. 


71 



Billion cubic feet. 

Flowage at 
Montgom- 



Evapora- 


ery (sec- 

Effective 

Addition 

tion on 

Total 

ond-feet). 

storage 

per 500 

reservoir 

capacity of 


required. 

second-feet. 

-t-o per ceni 
loss due to 

reservoir. 




control. 


6,000 

26.3 

4.3 

5.3 

31.6 

6,500 

30.6 

4.4 

5.5 

36.1 

7,000 

35.0 

4.6 

6.7 

41.7 

7,500 

40.6 

5.0 

7.0 

47.6 

8,000 

45.6 

4.7 

7.3 

52.9 

8,500 

50.3 

9.7 

7.5 

57.8 

9.000 

60.0 

16.3 

8.0 

68.0 

9,500 

76.3 

20.1 

8.8 

85.1 

10.000 

96.4 


10.6 

107.0 


TALLAPOOSA RESERVOIR NO. 1 ACTING IN CONJUNCTION WITH ETOWAH RES¬ 
ERVOIR, WHICH HOLDS MONTGOMERY AT 6,600 SECOND-FEET FLOWAGE. 


6.600 





7.000 

3.4 

4.8 

2.2 

5.6 

7,500 

8.2 

4.2 

2.4 

10.6 

8,000 

12.4 

5. 4 

4.1 

16.5 

8,500 

17.8 

6.0 

4.9 

22.7 

9,000 

23.8 

11.8 

5.2 

29.0 

9,500 

35.6 

19.8 

6.8 

42.4 

10.000 

55. 4 


7.8 

63.2 


Table No. 14. — Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1.—Effects of storage. 

[Effects .—Various storage capacities. Various methods of control. Various effects for power navigation 
(added to 6,600 second-feet due to Etowah Reservoir). Evaporation included in reservoir capacity. Col¬ 
umn N-N gives discharge of Alabama River at Montgomery in second-feet. Line N-P gives discharge of 
Tallapoosa River at dam site No. 1, Cherokee Bluff, in second-feet. Required reservoir capacity for vari¬ 
ous combinations is given in billion cubic feet. This table is obtained from various combinations of draw¬ 
ings Nos. 10 and 12.] 

DISCHARGE IN SECOND-FEET. 


Ala- 














bama 






Tallapoosa River. 






River. 













7 

N 

2,300 

2,400 

2,500 

2,600 

2,700 

2,800 

2,900 

3,000 

3,100 

3,200 

3,300 

3,400 

3,500 P 

8.000 

23. 79 

26.13 

29.48 

33.16 

36.50 

40.95 

44.53 

50.25 

55.50 

61.05 

66.80 

73.55 

80.52 

8.100 

24.35 

26.64 

30.00 

33.73 

37.05 

41.48 

45.04 

50 75 

56.04 

61.50 

67. 45 

74.10 

81.13 

8,200 

25.02 

27.41 

30.62 

34.42 

37. 71 

42.11 

45.65 

51.36 

56.60 

62.15 

69.00 

74.75 

81.75 

8,300 

25.85 

28.06 

31.33 

35.27 

38.52 

42. 85 

46.39 

52.06 

57.30 

62.96 

69.69 

76.45 

83.48 

8,400 

26. 82 

28.97 

32.20 

36.29 

39.42 

43.78 

47.20 

52.88 

58.10 

63.70 

70. 46 

77.25 

84.22 

8,500 

27.94 

30.03 

33.21 

37.51 

40. 62 

44.85 

48.18 

53.82 

59.05 

64.68 

71.35 

78.15 

85.17 

8,600 

29.18 

31.21 

34.32 

38.86 

41.90 

46.03 

49.27 

54.88 

60.00 

65.55 

72. 35 

79.10 

86.20 

8,700 

30.55 

32. 49 

35.52 

40.36 

43.32 

47.37 

50.51 

56.05 

61.10 

66.60 

73.35 

80.10 

87.10 

8,800 

32.08 

33.92 

36.85 

42. 04 

44.87 

48.82 

51.87 

57.36 

62. 40 

67.80 

74.45 

81.15 

87.98 

8,900 

33.76 

35.51 

38.32 

43.90 

46. 58 

50. 43 

53. 34 

58.78 

63. 60 

70.00 

76.52 

83.15 

89.00 

9.000 

34.54 

36.17 

38. 89 

46.00 

48.57 

52. 27 

54.84 

60.33 

65.15 

71.45 

77.95 

84.50 

91.12 

9,100 

37. 50 

39.00 

41.63 

48.12 

55.54 

54.13 

56. 73 

62.03 

66.75 

72.95 

79.30 

85.90 

92.48 

9,200 

39.59 

40.97 

43. 47 

50. 49 

52.75 

56.17 

58.64 

63.87 

69. 50 

74.46 

80.85 

87.35 

94.02 

9,300 

41.85 

43.09 

45. 47 

53. 07 

55.15 

58. 42 

60.67 

65.85 

71.15 

77.25 

83.53 

90.07 

95.70 

9,400 

44.16 

45.28 

47.53 

55. 77 

57.70 

60. 82 

62.91 

68.00 

73.50 

79.35 

85.71 

92.04 

98.68 

9,500 

46.68 

47.67 

49. 76 

58.68 

60. 43 

63.38 

65.28 

71.28 

76.80 

81.55 

87. 70 

94.00 

100. 42 

9.600 

49.31 

50.15 

52.13 

61.76 

63.31 

66.11 

69.27 

73. 75 

79.00 

84.70 

90.73 

96.00 

102.27 

9,700 

52.07 

52.79 

54.64 

65.08 

66.43 

70.06 

72.10 

77.47 

81.75 

87.31 

93.14 

99.27 

104.50 

9,800 

55.02 

55.62 

57.33 

69.62 

70.79 

73. 23 

76.13 

80. 37 

85. 45 

90.90 

95.70 

101.80 

108.00 

9,900 

57. 96 

58.43 

60.03 

73.24 

75. 24 

77.52 

79.30 

84.44 

88.65 

94.00 

99.66 

104.55 

110. 74 

10,000 

61.18 

61.54 

63.02 

78.18 

79.00 

81.12 

83. 76 

87.79 

92.50 

96. 78 

102. 28 

108. 15 

114.12 

N 

Reservoir capacity in billion cubic feet. 





























































1 2 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table No. 15. — Distances, elevations, and drainage areas, Tallapoosa River. 


Miles 

above 

Milstead. 

Drainage 
area (square 
miles). 

1--- 

Station. 

United 
States geo¬ 
logical 
datum 
elevation. 

0.0 
6. 0 

(3,620) 
3 114 

M list pad . 


Talla.sse.ft Pnwsr Co. (bp,low dam) .-. 

194.3 

8.5 


TTpppr pnd of pond . 

257.9 

9.5 

15.7 

3,104 

Montgomery Powpr Go. (bp,low dam).. .-. 

283.3 

TTpppr pnd of pond _ . 

323.3 

17.3 

2,848 

RfiSftrvoir Rn.m No. 1 (bp,low dam). 

342.0 

39.3 

(2,334) 

1,986 

1,436 

St.nrdftva.nt, . 

48.7 

TTpppr pnd of pond. 

490.0 

Reservoir Dam No. 2 (below dam, Blakes Ferry, Little Tallapoosa 
River). 

Crest of dam. 

680.0 



790.0 






Appendix J. 

Report op Assistant Engineer D. M. Andrews. 

Montgomery, Ala., March 10, 1910. 

Sir: I have the honor to submit, in what follows, a report upon an examination and 
survey of the Coosa River, its tributaries, and the Tallapoosa River with a view to the 
improvement of the Coosa and Alabama Rivers by means of reservoirs upon their 
headwaters, together with an investigation of the coordination of navigation and power 
on these streams. 

Nine estimates and five tables are submitted, as follows: 

Estimate (a) Six-foot navigation without power, Maj. Cavanaugh's estimate, 1905, 
in round numbers. 

Estimate (6) Six-foot navigation, six high dams, including substructures of power 
houses. 

Estimate (c) Nine-foot navigation without power. 

Estimate (d) Six-foot navigation and power with local storage only. 

Estimate (d) I. Six-foot navigation and power with local and Etowah storage. 

Table (d) TI. Six-foot navigation and power, physical conditions as to power. 

Table (d) III. Flo wage with cumulative local storage. 

Table ( d) IV. Flowage with Etowah and cumulative local storage. 

Table (d) V. Horsepower with cumulative local, and with Etowah and cumulative 
local storage. 

Table ( d ) VI. Storage reqi ired at Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1 to maintain a mini¬ 
mum flow at Montgomery of 8,000 second-feet combined with Etowah storage, and 
to furnish in addition the flow for power shown. 

Estimate (e). Etowah Storage Reservoir, spillway at 870. 

Estimate (/). Tallapoosa Storage Reservoir No. 1, spillway at elevation 470. 

Estimate (/) I. Tallapoosa Storage Reservoir No. 2, spillway at elevation 790. 

Estimate ( g ). Conasauga Storage Reservoir, spillway at elevation 1,110. 

Estimate (a) is Maj. Cavanaugh’s estimate, 1905, for 6-foot navigation, and is the 
most economical if power is not considered. 

Estimate ( b ) is for 6-foot navigation, Dams 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 
18 being replaced by six high dams for the development of power. The power-house 
substructure, being a part of the dam, is included in the cost of dam structures. The 
estimates for the remaining locks and dams remain as given in estimate (a). 

Estimate (c) is arrived at by raising all locks and dams of estimate (a) 3 feet, except 
1, 2, 6, and 7, which are replaced by high dams at 2 and 7. 

Estimates (d), (d) I, and Table (d) II are self-explanatory. 

The minimum flow of the Coosa River at Riverside, Ala., in 1904, the lowest recorded 
was 1,225 second-feet. The Riverside shortage curve, drawing No. 8, reduced from 
large scale drawing, gives the shortage in billions of cubic feet, after all losses have 
been deducted, required to maintain a given discharge in second-feet at Riverside 
during 1904. By means of this curve the increase in flow at each of the six power 
dams, due to cumulative storage at and above the dam, was found, assuming such 
increase the same as an equivalent storage above Riverside would provide there. 

Table (d) III was prepared by adding the flow due to cumulative storage at each 
power dam to the 1904 low-water flow, and adding or subtracting the run-off between 
the dam and Riverside and deducting losses due to lockages and leakage. 
























ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


73 


Table ( d ) IV was prepared by adding the cumulative local storage at each dam to 
Etowah storage and taking the resulting flow from the curve, drawing No. 8, and then 
proceeding as in Table (d) III. 

Table ( d ) IV, V, and estimates ( e ), (/), (/) I, and ( g ) are self-explanatory. 

RESERVOIRS. 

Reservoir dams .—The section or profile of the storage dams, drawing No. 13, is com¬ 
puted for a specific gravity of the material it is proposed to use of 2h. This figure 
assumes the mass of the dam composed of Cyclopean masonry, one-half concrete and 
one-half large derrick stone. 

The specific gravity of the stone of which it is proposed to build the Etowah Dam 
has been determined, as was also the weight per cubic foot of the sand it is proposed 
to use in the concrete, and, on the assumption of one-half concrete and one-half large 
stone, the specific gravity of the mass of the dam was found to be 2£. 

The resultants of the forces acting on the dam under the two assumptions that the 
water is at the crest and that the reservoir is empty are kept within the middle third 
until points are reached where the pressure per square foot at the down-stream face 
reaches 16,380 pounds, and at the up-stream face 20,480 pounds. Thence, down to 
the base, these limiting pressures are maintained. 

Etowah Reservoir .—Estimate (e) gives the cost of the Etowah Reservoir, which is, 
in round numbers, $4,000,000. This reservoir will impound 42,000,000,000 cubic feet, 
equivalent to 30,000,000,000 cubic feet effective storage at Riverside for the year 1904. 

It will be seen that the items of track revision, removal of industrial plants, revision 
of highways, removal and raising of bridges constitute $770,000 of the estimate. These 
structures might just as well have been placed outside the flooded area when built. 
The section of the State of Georgia in which the proposed reservoir is located is 
developing industrially, and this item of cost may be expected to grow with time at 
an increasing ratio. 

An excellent spillway was found. It, together with the dam, is shown in plan and 
section on map No. 12, sheets A and B. 

It is perhaps well to explain here that all maps referred to in this report are numbered 
as follows: 

Map 9, Tallapoosa River, reservoir site No. 1. 

Map 10, Tallapoosa River, reservoir site No. 2. 

Map 11, Conasauga River Reservoir site. 

Map 12, Etowah River Reservoir site. 

Map 13, Coosa River. 

Special sheets are given the letters of the alphabet after the proper map number. 

In what follows these maps are referred to in the following order: 

Etowah Reservoir, map 12. 

Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1, map 9. 

Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 2, map 10. 

Conasauga Reservoir, map 11. 

Coosa River, map 13. 

Map 12, sheets C and D, are topographical maps showing the location of levees on 
the Allatoona-Pumpkin Vine Creek divide, needed to prevent flow from the proposed 
reservoir into the Pumpkin Vine Creek Valley. 

Map No. 12, sheet E, shows the proposed relocation of the W. & A. R. R. There 
are 60 to 70 trains daily over this division of the road, and it will therefore be more 
economical to change the location as shown than attempt to raise the track and road¬ 
bed under such conditions of heavy traffic. Map 12, sheet F, shows conditions in the 
vicinity of Canton, Ga., and the portion of the L. & N. R. R. and the industrial plants 
that will have to be moved out of the flooded area. Canton proper is on a hill, well 
above the level of the reservoir. 

Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1 .—Drawing No. 14 is a graphical presentation of the storage 
capabilities of this reservoir for each foot height above 90 feet to 200 feet, and the 
corresponding cost of the reservoir. 

Map No. 9, sheet A, is a map of the proposed dam and spillway sites. The dam is a 
reservoir dam and is shown in section on drawing No. 13. The spillway is a weir 500 
feet long. 

The estimate of the cost of the reservoir does not include a tailrace dam to be placed 
immediately below the reservoir dam and designed to maintain a head varying 
within the range of power wheels, as the level of the reservoir fluctuates. The s^me 
thing can, perhaps, be accomplished with draft tubes equipped with the necessary 
valves and by-passes. 

Reference to Table No. (d) VI shows that a constant discharge of 2,500 second-feel 
for power and the needs of navigation require a storage of 29.48 billion cubic feet, 


74 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


which, combined with Etowah storage, will maintain a minimum flow of 8,000 second- 
feet at Montgomery. A reservoir of this capacity will require a dam 131 feet high (see 
drawing No. 14 and estimate (/)) and will cost $1,750,000. 

Were navigation alone considered 15,000,000,000 cubic feet at Tallapoosa storage 
with that from the Etowah would afford a minimum flow of 8,000 second-feet at Mont¬ 
gomery. A reservoir of this capacity will require a dam 100 feet high and will cost 
$1,086,000. 

Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 2 .—Estimate (f) I gives the cost of the reservoir, site No. 
2, near Blakes Ferry, and is in round numbers $1,340,000. This reservoir has a total 
storage capacity of 11*000,000.000 cubic feet and an effective capaicty of 9,000,000,000 
cubic feet. The storage of this reservoir is not needed for navigation at present, but 
the site is available for development when the needs of navigation or power require 
the additional flow. Map No. 10, sheet A, shows the site of the proposed dam and 
spillway. 

Conasauga Reservoir .—The cost of the Conasauga Reservoir is given in estimate ( g), 
and is in round numbers $1,150,000. This reservoir will impound the entire dis¬ 
charge of the Conasauga and Jack Rivers, which is estimated to be 6,000,000,000 cubic 
feet, the equivalent of 4,000,000,000 cubic feet effective storage at Riverside, Ala., in 
1904. Referring this storage to the shortage curve, drawing No. 8, and it is seen that it 
will supply a shortage in the 1904 flow of the Coosa River at Riverside of 1,000 second- 
feet; combined with cumulative local storage it will furnish a shortage flow of 400 
second-feet at Dam 18; combined with cumulative local and Etowah storage it will 
furnish a shortage flow of 200 second-feet. Map 11, sheet A, is a topographical map of 
the dam and spillway site. 

The estimated cost of the Conasauga Reservoir, previously given, is $1,150,000. It 
is estimated that the cost of 12.5 billion cubic feet additional storage at the Etowah 
Reservoir is $750,000. The addition to the Etowah Reservoir, therefore, costs $400,000 
less than storage on the Conasauga, while the capacity of the former is 9,000,000,000 
cubic feet effective storage as compared with 4,000,000,000 cubic feet at the latter. 

Etowah and Tallapoosa storage will supply the present needs of navigation; there¬ 
fore Conasauga storage need not be considered further until the demands of naviga¬ 
tion on the upper Coosa and power on the Conasauga and Coosa Rivers justify its 
development. 

Flood control .—The estimated maximum discharge of the Etowah River at the 
proposed dam site is 37,400 second-feet. If there were no pondage above the spill¬ 
way, this discharge would raise the level above at once to 6.85 feet. But with pondage 
over the area of the reservoir the rise will be much slower, as shown on the upper 
discharge curve, drawing No. 15. The service pipes through the dam will, however, 
carry 9,400 second-feet, and the effect of the combined discharge through them and 
the spillway is shown on the lower curve. Theoretically the maximum heights of 6.85 
and 5.75 feet under the two conditions would be reached only after an infinite number 
of days at the maximum rate of discharge; but practically they would be reached at 
the end of the eighth day, and the maximum flood would be delayed that length of 
time under the assumed condition that the level of the reservoir was at the sill of 
the spillway when the flood began. 

The records, as far as they go, show that the maximum discharge has occurred only 
once, and then lasted only one day. Fortunately the records of the same flood at 
Rome, Ga., and Montgomery, Ala., are available, and the probable effect of the 
reservoir upon flood control at these places can be shown. 

The watersheds of the Etowah, Oostanaula, Coosawattee, and Conasauga are near 
each other, and it is probable that any general rain, such as would produce a flood in 
the Coosa River, would occur simultaneously over their watersheds, and the floods 
from each would reach Rome about the same time; therefore the holding back of the 
flood from the Etowah would have a marked beneficial effect upon the intensity of 
the flood at Rome, as is shown below. 

On December 29, 1901, the date of the greatest recorded flood on the Etowah River, 
the discharge at the proposed dam site reached the maximum of 37,400 second-feet. 
Assuming the valves in the proposed dam closed, then with this one-day maximum 
discharge into the reservoir the discharge from the spillway would have reached 
8,300 second-feet, with a depth on the spillway of 2.83 feet, 2.94 billion cubic feet would 
have been held back, equivalent to a discharge of 34,070 second-feet for one day. 

The discharge of the Coosa River at Rome during this flood was as follows: Decem¬ 
ber 29, 1901, 40,402 second-feet; December 30, 58,000 second-feet; December 31, 
64,420 second-feet; January 1,1902, 54,940 second-feet. It is probable that the maxi¬ 
mum flood from the Etowah reached Rome on December 31. Had the reservoir 
dam been built the maximum discharge at Rome would have been 30,350 second-feet 
instead of 64,420, and the gauge height would have been lowered from 32.6 to 15.8 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


75 


feet, but the river would have fallen more slowly after the crest of the flood had 
passed. 

The maximum rise at Montgomery, Ala., during the same flood was 46.1 feet at 3 
p. m. January 1, 1902. It is estimated that the maximum discharge of the Etowah 
at the proposed dam site reached Montgomery in five days; that is, on January 3, 
1902, when the gauge there read 42.5 feet, corresponding to a discharge of 133,300 
second-feet. Deducting 34,070 second-feet for the flow that would have been held 
back by the proposed Etowah Reservoir, and the gauge at Montgomery would have 
been lowered from 42.5 feet to 33.4 feet. 

Under conditions of flow prevailing during the flood under discussion, the proposed 
Etowah Reservoir would not have lowered the extreme height of the flood at Mont¬ 
gomery. It would, however, have caused a rapid fall. 

In the following discussion of flood control by the proposed Tallapoosa Reservoir 
No. 1, a spillway length of 600 feet and 3,000 second-feet flow for power are assumed. 
The proposed spillway is a weir, and the height of the reservoir surface above the crest 
is computed by the Weisbach formula for unsubmerged dams. By means of this 
formula the curve, drawing No. 16, was constructed, h being the height of the reser¬ 
voir surface above the crest of the spillway, Q the corresponding discharge over the 
weir, and D the sum of the discharges over the weir and through the power wheels. 

For the purpose of this discussion the high water of December, 1901-January, 1902 f 
is employed. This is the flood used in the discussion of flood control by the Etowah 
Reservoir. 

On December 30,1901, the date of maximum flood on the Tallapoosa River, the 
discharge at the proposed dam site was 27,170 second-feet. Reference to the curve, 
drawing No. 16, shows that the height of 4.88 feet would be reached only after an 
infinite number of days at the maximum rate of discharge; but, practically this 
height would be reached at the end of 11 days. As a matter of fact the maximum dis¬ 
charge extended over less than 1 day; but, assuming that it. did extend over 1 
entire day, then the reservoir would have reached a height of 1.37 feet above the 
crest of the proposed spillway, and would have impounded 1.96 billion cubic feet, 
corresponding to a discharge of 22,740 second-feet for 1 day. 

As previously stated the maximum rise at Montgomery was 46.1 feet at 3 p. m.. 
January 1, 1902, corresponding to a discharge there of 148,650 second-feet. It is 
probable that the maximum flood of December 30, 1901, at the proposed dam site, 
reached Montgomery at the time of maximum flood stage at the latter place; this 
being true, the flood discharge there would have been reduced by flood control at 
the Tallapoosa Reservoir to 125,910 second-feet, corresponding to a gauge height of 
40 feet. The effect, therefore, of the proposed Tallapoosa Reservoir, under the as¬ 
sumed condition that the rise begins with the reservoir level at the crest of the spill- 
wav, will be to lower the height at Montgomery of a flood similar to that of January 
1, 1902, 6.1 feet. 

In the above discussion only one condition of control has been assumed, namely, 
that the respective reservoir levels were at the sill of the spillway of the Etowah 
Reservoir and at the crest of the spillway of the Tallapoosa Reservoir when the flood 
began, and that the maximum flow into the reservoirs continued during one day. 
Had the levels of the reservoirs been below the sill and crest of the spillways, the 
flood control would have been greater. Had it been above, the control would have 
been less. The greater the number of days duration of the maximum discharge, 
the less the effect of control becomes. 

The general effect will be to lessen the height of floods and to lengthen their dura¬ 
tion. 

Minerals and underground flow .—The great “Cartersville fault” passes south of the 
proposed dam site, and does not enter the proposed reservoir area at all. 

The fault marks a distinct division between the Paleozoic on the south and the 
Archean on the north. The minerals of importance, except marble, are found in the 
Paleozoic. The marble, and some small deposits of iron ore within the flooded area 
lie well above the reservoir level. 

Investigation of wells and springs in this vicinity indicates that their sources of 
supply are from local surface seepage. This, together with the crystalline character 
of the rock in the proposed flooded area precludes the probability of underground 
flow from the reservoir. 

The rocks of the flooded areas of the proposed Tallapoosa and (onasauga Reser¬ 
voirs are crystalline in character, and loss from underground flow need not be 
expected. 

Silting .—Silting at existing dams on the Etowah, Tallapoosa, and Gonnasauga 
Rivers was carefully investigated, some of the dams having been in existence for 70 
years. No evidences of the movement of heavy material were found. Only light 


76 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


loam and clay held in suspension had been deposited. It was shown in your pre¬ 
liminary report that a period of 6,000 years would be required for reservoirs on these 
streams to fill with such material. 

EFFECT OF ETOWAH STORAGE UPON THE NAVIGATION OF THE COOSA RIVER. 

The mean slope of the Coosa River from Rome, Ga., to Gadsden, Ala., is 1: 9,800. 
There is no obstruction in this part of the river at which a slope of 1:2,000 can not be 
secured by means of works of regulation, except at Horseleg Shoals, where it is pro¬ 
posed to provide a lock and dam. 

A minimum flow of 4,000 second-feet maintained at Riverside will result in a mini¬ 
mum flow at Rome of 3,500 second-feet. This flow on a slope of 1: 2,000 will maintain 
channel depths and widths as shown below: 


Depth. 

Width. 

Feet. 

Feet. 

4 

310 

5 

210 

6 

157 

7 

121 


It is thus seen that 4-foot navigation can be easily secured, and if ai any time in the 
future the demands of navigation require 6 feet, the passage from one depth to the 
other can be made by further contraction, far more economically than by raising locks 
and dams, if such structures had been already built for 4-foot navigation. 

A comparison of the cost of improving this section of the river for 4-foot navigation 
by means of locks and dams and by Etowah storage and regulation works is given 
below: 


Items of improvement. 

Slack-water 
navigation, 
locks and 
dams. 

Open-river 

navigation, 

Etowah 

storage. 

7.5 locks and dams at $241,000. 

$1,807,500 

1,250,000 


Operation and maintenance, $5,000 each per year, capitalized at 3 per cent.. 
One lock and dam at Horseleg Shoals. 

$241,000 
167,000 
100,000 
667,000 

1,175,000 

Operation and maintenance, $5,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 

Regulation works. 


Maintenance, $20,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 


Total. 

3,057,500 



The improvement for open-river navigation by means of Etowah storage and regu¬ 
lation works is $1,882,500 more economical than the improvement for slack-water 
navigation by means of locks and dams. This estimate assumes that the cost of the 
Etowah Reservoir is charged to the improvement of the Alabama River, as proposed 
in estimates that follow. 

EFFECT OF ETOWAH STORAGE UPON THE NAVIGATION OF THE ALABAMA RIVER. 

Etowah storage and storage at the power dams on the Coosa River, with the natural 
flow of the Alabama River, will supply a minimum flow at Montgomery of 6,600 
second-feet. Such a flow will maintain a channel depth and width of 7 feet and 355 
feet, respectively, on a slope of 1: 5,000. 

The low-water flow of the Alabama River in 1904 was 2,100 second-feet. With 
such a discharge, 6-foot navigation is impracticable (see Table 3, with your prelimi¬ 
nary report), and it is believed that 4-foot navigation the year round is impracticable 
also. Therefore a project for the improvement of the Coosa and Alabama Rivers is 
a choice between slack-water navigation throughout the length of these streams and 
open-river navigation, with storage on their headwaters and locks and dams, with 
slack-water navigation over the rapids between Gadsden and Wetumpka. 

The zero of the Wetumpka gauge, mean low water, is 115.32 feet above mean sea 
level at Mobile. Dividing this into equal steps of 12 feet each, gives 9.61 locks and 
dams required from tidewater near Mobile to Wetumpka. Basing the cost of each 





















ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


77 


lock and dam on the cost of similar structures for 6-foot navigation on the lower War¬ 
rior River, a stream of the general character of the Alabama, and each lock and dam 
will cost $700,000, or a total cost for 9.61 locks of $6,727,000. 

In order to present a clear comparison between the cost of the two projects, the 
following table has been prepared, all fixed charges appearing capitalized at 3 per 
cent: 


,J 


- Items of improvement. 

Slack-water 
navigation, 
locks and 
dams, cost. 

Open-river 
navigation, 
Etowah stor¬ 
age, cost. 

Slack-waier improvement, Coosa River, Rome to Gadsden, 7.5 locks and 
dams. 

$1,807,500 

12,753,000 

6,727,000 

4,518,333 


Estimate (6). 


9.61 locks, Wetumpka to Mobile. 


Operation and maintenance, 21.11 leeks and dams, $5,000 each per year; 10 
locks, at $3,000 per yea* - , capitalized at 3 per cent. 


Etowah Reservoir. 

$4,000,000 

333,333 

1,007,667 

12,753,000 

2,500,000 

1,000,000 

3,333,333 

24,927,333 

Operation and maintenance, $10,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 

Open-river navigation, Rome to Gadsden, including lock and dam at Horse- 
leg Shoals... . 


Estimate (6). 


Operation and maintenance, 9 locks and dams, at $5,000, and 10 locks, at 
$3,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 


Regulation work's, Alabama River. 


Maintenance, $100,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 

Total. 

25,805,833 



Economy of open-river navigation with Etowah storage, $878,500. 


EFFECT OF TALLAPOOSA AND ETOWAH STORAGE UPON THE NAVIGATION OF THE 

ALABAMA RIVER. 

The proposed storage on the Etowah and Tallapoosa Rivers will maintain a mini¬ 
mum flow at Montgomery of 8.000 second-feet. Reference to Table No. 3, with your 
preliminary report, shows that such a flow for a channel depth of 7 feet will require 
channel widths as follows: Slope 1:5,000. width 460 feet; Slope 1:2.000, width 300 
feet. 

It has been shown that the cost of improving the Coosa and Alabama Rivers for 
6-foot navigation by storage on the Etowah is $878,500 more economical than their 
improvement for slack-water navigation by means of locks and dams throughout their 
length. As Tallapoosa storage only affects the navigation of the Alabama River, a 
comparison of the cost of 6-foot navigation on this stream by means of works of regu¬ 
lation with and without Tallapoosa storage, given in the following table, shows the 
relative economy of each project, it being assumed in each case that Etowah storage 
is available and all fixed charges being capitalized at 3 per cent: 


Items of improvement. 

6-foot navigation. 

Works of reg¬ 
ulation, cost. 

Tallapoosa 
storage, cost. 

Works of regulation . 

$1,000,000 

3,333,333 


Maintenance, $100 000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 


Tallapoosa reservoir. 

$1,750,000 
333,333 
500,000 
1,000,000 

Operating and maintenance, $10 000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 


\Vnrks nf regulation . 


Maintenance of channel $30,000 per year, capitalized at 3 per cent. 


Total . 


4,333,333 

3,583,333 



Economy of Tallapoosa storage, $750,000. 


The preceding estimates are based on very complete data and on current prices in 
the vicinity of the proposed improvements, except the estimates for works of regu¬ 
lation and "maintenance of channel. These latter are matters of judgment and are 
believed to be ample. 

Summing up, the comparative cost of 6-foot slack-water navigation on the Coosa 
and Alabama Rivers without storage is $25,805,833. With slack-water navigation 


















































78 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


over the rapids between Wetumpka and Gadsden on the Coosa and open-river navi¬ 
gation between Rome and Gadsden and on the Alabama, with Etowah and Tallapoosa 
storage, the comparative cost is $24,177,333. The economy of the improvement with 
Etowah and Tallapoosa storage is therefore $1,628,500. 

In the preceding discussion the estimates are all comparative; that is, the fixed 
charges are included, capitalized at 3 per cent. In the following statement is given 
the total estimated cost of the improvement of the Coosa and Alabama Rivers, in 
v,which the capitalized fixed charges are omitted. The estimate is for Etowah and 
Tallapoosa storage, and six power dams on the Coosa, and the development of power 


at the reservoir dam on the Tallapoosa. 

Etowah Reservoir, estimate (e). $4, 000, 000 

Lock and dam at Mayo’s bar. 241, 000 

Locks and dams, Gadsden to Wetumpka, estimate ( b ). 12, 763, 000 

Tallapoosa Reservoir, estimate (/). 1, 750, 000 

2 equalizing dams. 320, 000 


19, 074, 000 

Projects already approved by department: 

Lock and dam at Mayo’s bar. $241, 000 

Lock and Dam 4. 282, 000 

Dam 5. 134, 000 

- 657,000 


To complete improvement for 6-foot navigation. 18, 417, 000 


NAVIGATION AND POWER ON THE COOSA RIVER. 

In the cost of the 6 high dams, estimate (6), is included the cost of power-house 
substructures, for, if power is to be developed at these dams, even at some future 
day, these substructures should be built now as a part of the dam; to omit them 
would entail an enormous additional expense when the power at the dams is developed. 

The following statement gives a comparison of the cost for 6-foot navigation alone 
and in cooperation with power for the Gadsden-Wetumpka section. 


Navigation alone. 

Estimate (a). $10,025,000 

Operation and maintenance 20 locks and dams at $5,000 per year, capi¬ 
talized at 3 per cent. 3, 333, 333 

Total. 13, 358, 333 

Navigation arid power. 

Estimate (6). 12, 753, 000 

Operation and maintenance 8 locks and dams, at $5,000 per year, capital¬ 
ized at 3 per cent.*. 1, 333, 333 

10 locks, at $3,000. 1, 000, 000 

Total. 15, 086, 333 

Excess of cost of navigation and power over navigation alone. 1, 728, 000 


If power builds the power dams, including substructures of power houses, then 
estimate (6) becomes $7,177,000 and conditions are reversed; the excess of cost for 
navigation alone over power and navigation becomes $3,648,000. 

POWER. 

The estimated average cost of 10-hour power for 196,908 horsepowers, primary and 
secondary, developed by the natural flow of the Coosa River and local storage at the 
six power dams, including the cost of dams, substructures and superstructures of 
power houses; hydroelectric equipment, including switchboards, step-up and step- 
down stations, transmission lines, loss of interest during construction, engineering 
and legal expenses and equalizing dam is $104.74 per horsepower. 

The secondary power is assumed as equal to the primary power, and as being three- 
fourths as effective, this assumption being well within the requirements of good 
practice. 




























ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


79 


Secondary power, if it can find a market at all, will probably sell for $5 less per 
horsepower per year than primary power. Referring to Table ( d) V, Column IV, it is 
seen that with Etowah storage the 98,354 secondary power in Column II becomes 
primary, and is therefore increased $5 per horsepower per year in value at no additional 
cost to power. 

Etowah storage adds an additional primary power, see Table (d) V, Column V, of 
25,477 horsepowers. It is estimated that this power delivered will cost for installation 
$58.04 per horsepower, or $46.70 less than the original installation. The value of the 
right to utilize power that can be produced at this cost, which is about 20 per cent of 
the average cost for development of hydroelectric power in the United States, is very 
great. 

The proposed dam, Tallapoosa Reservoir No. 1, 131 feet high, will develop fifty 
thousand 10-hour delivered primary horsepowers with a constant flow of 2,500 second- 
feet. 

The head used in computing this power is the mean of the heads when the reservoir 
is full, and when drawn down to within 90 feet of the bottom. The lower head will be 
reached only in a cycle of years such as were 1903, 1904, and 1905, and when this 
occurs the additional flow for navigation will compensate for the loss of head. 

EQUALIZING DAMS. 

The estimates and discussions of power in this report are based on 10-liour power; 
that is, that power from the dams will be delivered only during 10 hours each day, 
and that the flow of the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers will be held back 14 hours of the 
24 during periods of minimum flow. This would result in a discharge 2.4 times greater 
than the minimum during 10 hours of each day, and an entire cessation of flow the 
remainder of the time. It is thus obvious that equalizing dams below the power dams 
are essential to the proper control of the flow of the Alabama River. 

It is proposed to make Dam 19 an equalizing dam on the Coosa River, at an addi¬ 
tional estimated cost of $220,000. In order to prevent excessive flood heights it was 
necessary to lengthen the spillway 300 feet in adapting the dam to the purpose of an 
equalizing dam. A large part of the additional cost is due to this increase in length. 

It is estimated that an equalizing dam on the Tallapoosa below the falls at Tallassee 
will cost $100,000. 

Canals around high dams .—Estimates for canals around the power dams at proposed 
sites 12, 14, 15, and 18 are included in the estimates for locks at those sites in estimates 
(6), ( d ), and (d) I. It is not considered safe for a large tow to approach near one of the 
power dams, but with the canals that have been provided for, a tug with a tow has 
ample distance in which to “back up” should it miss the entrance to the canal. 
Long upper guide piers have been provided for at sites 2 and 7. Map 13, sheets A and 

B, shows the locations of the proposed canals around Dams 12 and 18. 

Foundations .—Borings for foundations have been made at dam sites Nos. 12, 14, 

and 15, and partial borings at site No. 18. At all these places perfect foundations 
have been found, as shown on cross sections of sites 12, 14, and 15, map No. 13, sheets 

C, D, and E. While no borings have been taken at site No. 7, the outcropping rock 
there gives every indication of excellent foundation. Past experience with founda¬ 
tion at site No. 2 has shown perfect foundation there. 

FUTURE NEEDS OF NAVIGATION. 

Considerations of economy require that the future needs of navigation be foreseen 
and provided for in the study of any project for the improvement of the Coosa and 
Alabama Rivers. It is reasonable to assume that, as the country develops and popu¬ 
lation increases, our rivers will be more and more used as lines of transportation and 
greater depths will be called for. This is especially true of the Coosa and Alabama 
Rivers, which, penetrating the mining and manufacturing section of the South as 
they do and emptying into the Gulf, are destined to become important feeders to 
the traffic of the Panama Canal. 

Slack-water navigation by means of locks and dams gives an assured depth the year 
round, but, on the other hand, the change to a greater depth of navigation requires 
the raising of dams and the enlargement of locks at a cost perhaps little less than the 
cost of the original improvement; and, then, too, in an alluvial stream, such as is the 
Alabama, it is probable that in time the pools between dams will fill and require 
constant dredging to maintain a channel through them. 

A reservoir of 130,000,000.000 cubic feet capacity on the Tallapoosa River at the 
proposed site No. 1 will impound the mean annual flow of the Tallapoosa of 1901 to 
1908, inclusive. A reservoir of this capacity (see drawing No. 14) will require a 


80 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS 


dam 190 feet high and will co 3 t $4,800,000, including $150,000 for an equalizing dam. 
Such a reservoir will afford an effective storage of 120,000,000,000 cubic feet, which 
will supply 3,500 second-feet constant flow for power, and, with Etowah storage, 
will furnish a minimum flow at Montgomery of 10,500 second-feet and 9-foot naviga¬ 
tion. This is the limit of storage development. But with the ultimate storage con¬ 
stant, the figures for navigation and power can be varied either way; that is, if the 
flow for power is decreased, the flow for navigation increases, and vice versa. 

The lock and dam numbers referred to throughout this report are the numbers as 
used in Maj. Cavanaugh’s report of 1905. 

Respectfully submitted. 

D. M. Andrews, Assistant Engineer. 

Capt. H, B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Estimate (a). — Six-foot navigation without power. 


[Maj. Cavanaugh’s report, 1905, in round numbers.] 


Lock No. 


1. 

2. 

3 . 

4 . 

5 . 

6 . 

7 . 

8 . 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13 . 

14 . 

15 . 

16 . 

17 . 

18 . 

19 . 

20 . 

Total 


Locks 

(cost). 

Dams 

(cost). 

Channel 

excavation 

(cost). 

Flooded 

lands 

(cost). 

Total. 

$100,000 

$75,000 

$71,000 


$246,000 

111,000 

21,000 

6,000 


138,000 

413,000 

3,000 

4,000 


420, 000 

282,000 

12,000 

224,000 

$24,000 

542,000 

132,000 

114,000 

31,000 

9,000 

286,000 

239,000 

143,000 

19,000 

23,000 

424,000 

168,000 

105,000 

41,000 

5,000 

319,000 

203,000 

87,000 


4,000 

294,000 

267,000 

96,000 

18,000 

6,000 

387,000 

257,000 

209,000 


32,000 

498,000 

303,000 

259,000 


20,000 

582,000 

681,000 

368,000 


6,000 

1,055,000 

559,000 

368,000 


5,000 

932,000 

487,000 

235,000 


4,000 

726,000 

649,000 

265,000 


9,000 

923,000 

348,000 

274,000 

5,000 

2,000 

629,000 

345,000 

157,000 


3,000 

505,000 

313,000 

133,000 


2,000 

448,000 

416, 000 

148,000 


2,000 

566,000 

28,000 

31,000 

46,000 


105,000 

6,301,000 

3,103,000 

465,000 

156,000 

10,025,000 


Estimate ( b ).— Six-foot navigation , 6 high dams, including substructures of power houses. 


Lock No. 

Locks 

(cost). 

Dams 

(cost). 

Channel 

excavation 

(cost). 

Flooded 

lands 

(cost). 

Total. 

li. 






2. 

$267,000 
413,000 
282,000 
132,000 

} 369,000 

$410,000 
3,000 
12,000 
114,000 

404.000 

$16,000 
4,000 
224,000 
31,000 

41,000 

$28,000 

$721,000 
420,000 
542,000 
286,000 

880,000 

3. 

4. 

24, 000 

5. 

9,000 

6. 

7. 

66,000 

8. 

203,000 

87,000 


4,000 

294,000 
387,000 
498,000 

9. 

267,000 
257,000 

| 837,000 

96; 000 
209, 000 

18,000 

6; 000 
32,000 

41,000 

10. 

11. 

1,483,000 


12. 


2,364,000 




13. 

| 756,000 

926,000 


2,000 

1,684, 000 

14. 



15. 

674,000 

1 

754,000 


14,000 

1,442,000 

16. 


17. 

|> 942,000 

1,599,000 


23,000 

2,564,000 

18. 


19.•„. 

416,000 
28,000 

148,000 
31,000 


2,000 

566,000 
105,000 

20. 

46,000 



Total. 

5,843,000 

6,276,000 

380,000 

254,000 

12,753,000 



i Out. 






































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS 

Estimate (c). — Nine-foot navigation without power. 


81 


Lock No. 

Locks 

(cost). 

Dams 

(cost). 

Channel 

excavation 

(cost). 

Flooded 

lands 

(cost). 

Total. 

1 i. 






2. 

3174,000 
518,000 
314,000 
144,000 

$188,000 

30,000 

37,000 

148,000 

$66,000 
4,000 
224,000 
31,000 

$28,000 
2,000 
33,000 
9,000 

$456,000 
554,000 
608,000 
332,000 

3. 

4. 


6 1 .. 

7... 

394,000 
217,000 
283,000 
275,000 
323,000 
707,000 
585,000 
510,000 
675,000 
368,000 
365,000 
333,000 
439,000 
43,000 

375,000 
116,000 
108,000 
240,000 
297,000 
405,000 
405,000 
266,000 
292,000 
313,000 
182,000 
153,000 
166,000 
34,000 

41,000 

73,000 
4,000 
6,000 
32,000 
19,000 
6,000 
5,000 
3,000 
9,000 
2,000 
3,000 
1,000 
2,000 

883,000 
337,000 
415,000 
547,000 
639,000 
1,118,000 
995,000 
779,000 
976,000 
688,000 
550,000 
487,000 
607,000 
123,000 

8. 

9. 

18,000 

10. 

11. 


12. 


13. 


14. 


15. 


16. 

5,000 

17. 

18. 


19. 


20. 

46,000 

Total. 


6,667,000 

3,755,000 

435,000 

237,000 

11,094,000 


i Out. 


Estimate (d). — Six-foot navigation and power with local storage only. 


Lock No. 

Locks 

(cost). 

Dams 1 
(cost). 

Power 2 
(cost). 

Channel 

excavation 

(cost). 

Flooded 
lands 
(cost). • 

Total. 

1J. 







2. 

$267,000 
413,000 
282,000 
132,000 

| 369,000 

$410,000 

3,000 

12,000 

114,000 

404,000 

$674,000 

$16,000 
4,000 
224,000 

$28,000 

$1,395,000 

420,000 

542,000 

286,000 

1,649,000 

3. 

4 . 


24,000 

9,000 

66,000 

5. 


31;000 

41,000 

6. 

769,000 

7. 

8 . 

203,000 

267,000 

257,000 

} 837,000 

87,000 

96,000 

209,000 

1,483,000 



4,000 

6,000 

32,000 

44,000 

294,000 

387,000 

498,000 

9 . 


18,000 

10 . 


11. 

1,638,000 

• 

4,002,000 

12 . 


13. 

| 756.000 

926,000 

1,354,000 


2,000 

3,038,000 

14. 


15 _ _ .. 

674,000 

1 

754,000 

1,309,000 


14,000 

2,751,000 

16. 



17 . 

^ 942,000 

1,599,000 

1,830,000 


23,000 

4,394,000 

18. 


19 

416,000 

28,000 

148,000 

31,000 



2,000 

566,000 

105,000 

20 


46,000 




Total.. 

5,843,000 

6,276,000 

7,574,000 

380,000 

254,000 

20,327,000 



i Cost of power house, substructure included. 

1 Cost of power house, superstructure, and complete hydroelectric equipment, except transmission line. 
* Out. 


H. Doc. 253, fK3-l-6 



































































































82 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVEKS. 

Estimate (d) I. — Six-foot navigation and power with local and Etowah storage. 


Lock No. 


13 . 

2 .. 

3 .. 

4 .. 

5.. 

6 .. 

7 .. 

8 .. 

9.. 

10 .. 

11 .. 

12 .. 

13 .. 

14 .. 

15 .. 

16 .. 

17 .. 

18 .. 

19 .. 

20 .. 


Total. 


Locks 

(cost). 

Dams 1 
(cost). 

Power 2 
(cost). 

Channel 

excavation 

(cost). 

Flooded 

lands 

(cost). 

Total. 







$267,000 
413,000 

$410,000 
3,000 
12,000 

$856,000 

$16,000 

4,000 

$28,000 

$1,577,000 
420,000 
542,000 

282,000 


224.000 

24,000 

132,000 

114,000 


31,000 

9,000 

286,000 

369,000 

203,000 
267,000 
257,000 

837,000 

404,000 

87,000 
96,000 
209,000 

1,483,000 

957,000 

41.000 

66,000 

4,000 

6,000 

32,000 

44,000 

1,837,000 
294,000 


18,000 

387;000 
498,000 

4,204,000 

1,840,000 


756,000 

926,000 

1,520,000 


2,000 

3,204,000 

674,000 

754,000 

1,445,000 


14,000 

2,887,000 

942,000 

416,000 
28,000 

1,599,000 

148,000 

31,000 

1,985,000 


23,0C0 

2,000 

4,549,000 

566,000 

105,000 


46,000 

5,843,000 

6,276,000 

8,603,000 

380,000 

254,000 

21,356,000 


1 See footnote estimate (<*). 2 See footnote estimate. 3 Out. 


Table (d) II. — Six-foot navigation and power , physical conditions as to power. 


Lock No. 

Lift, low 
water. 

Low water. 

High water. 

Length of spillway. 

Height 
over all. 

Upper 

pool. 

Lower 

pool. 

Upper 

pool. 

Lower 

pool. 

Total. 

Clear. 

2 . 

26 

527.0 

501.0 

533.0 

• 518.0 

1,400 

1,120 


7 . 

29 

475.0 

446.0 

485.0 

464.0 

'980 

'980 

10.0 

12 . 

58 

410.0 

352.0 

420.5 

366.0 

1,160 

930 

10.5 

14 . 

55 

352.0 

297.0 

362.5 

318.5 

900 

900 

10.5 

15 . 

43 

297.0 

254.0 

310.0 

270.0 

850 

680 

* 13.0 

18 . 

64 

254.0 

190 

267.0 

209.0 

850 

680 

13.0 


Table (d) III. — Flowage with cumulative local storage. 


Lock No. 

Effective 

power 

head. 

Low-water flow, 
second-feet. 

14-hour pondage. 

Local storage 
remaining. 

Add to 
flow ac¬ 
count of 
local 
storage. 

Minimum 
flow with 
cumula¬ 
tive local 
storage 
(1904). 

Normal. 

Effective. 

Feet 

depth. 

Millions 
cubic feet. 

Feet 

depth. 

Millions 
cubic feet. 

2 . 

26 

1,170 

1,063 

0.33 

55 

7.67 

1,305 

500 

1,563 

7 . 

29 

1,298 

1,173 





500 

1 673 

12 . 

63 

L453 

L313 

0.41 

78 

9.59 

1,821 

800 

2,113 

14 .. 

50 

1,474 

1,338 





800 

2 138 

16 . 

42 

1,554 

L432 

0.84 

82 

4.16 

405 

855 

2,287 

18 . 

63 

1,568 

1,415 

0.80 

86 

5.20 

557 

945 

2; 360 
























































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 
Table (d) IV .—Flowage with Etowah and cumulative local storage. 


83 


Lock No. 

Effective 

power 

head. 

Low-water flow, 
second-feet. 

14-hour pondage. 

Local storage 
remaining. 

Add to 
flow ac¬ 
count of 
cumula¬ 
tive local 
and 

Etowah 

storage 

Minimum 
flow with 
cumula¬ 
tive local 
and 

Etowah 

storage 

(1904). 

Normal. 

Effective. 

Feet 

depth. 

Millions 
cubic feet. 

Feet 

depth. 

Millions 
cubic feet. 

2 . 

26 

1,170 

1,063 

1.20 

206 

6.80 

1,155 

2,909 

3,970 

7. 

29 

1,298 

1,173 





2,991 

4,164 

12 . 

63 

1,453 

1,313 

1.30 

246 

8.70 

1,652 

3^ 434 

4; 747 

14. 

50 

1,474 

1,338 





3,462 

4, 800 

15. 

42 

1,554 

L432 

. 

2.00 

261 

3.00 

217 

2,619 

5,051 

18. 

63 

1,568 

1,415 

2.40 

266 

3.60 

377 

3,705 

5,120 


Table (d) V .—Horsepower with cumulative local and with Etowah and cumulative local 

storage. 

[Coosa River.] 




Cumulative local stor¬ 
age, 1904. 

Cumu lative 
local and 
Etowah 
storage. 

Increase on account of 
Etowah storage. 

Dam No. 

Effi¬ 
ciency, 
per cent. 

I. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 

V. 



Primary, 
10 -hour, de¬ 
livered. 

Secondary, 
10 -hour, de¬ 
livered. 

Primary, 
10 -hour, de¬ 
livered. 

Secondary, 
made pri¬ 
mary, 10- 
hour, de¬ 
livered. 

Additional, 
10 -hour, pri¬ 
mary deliv¬ 
ered. 

2 . 

50 

6,650 

6,650 

16,891 

6,650 

3,591 

7. 

60 

7,939 

7,939 

19,760 

7,939 

3,882 

12 . 

64 

23,235 

23,235 

52,200 

23,235 

5,730 

14. 

62 

18,076 

18,076 

40,582 

18,076 

4,430 

15. 

63 

16,503 

16,503 

36,450 

16,503 

3,444 

18. 

64 

25,951 

25,951 

56,302 

25,951 

4,400 

Total. 


98,354 

98,354 

222,185 

98,354 

25,477 


Table (d) VI .—Required reservoir capacity to maintain flowage as shown 1903, 1904, 

and 1905. 

[Riverside, 4,600; Montgomery, 8,000. Storage expressed in billions of cubic feet.] 


Constant flow- 
age required 
for power. 

Storage re¬ 
quired for 
power. 

Additional stor¬ 
age required for 
navigation. 

Total required 
for power and 
navigation. 

3,000 

48.6 

1.65 

50.25 

2,900 

42.4 

2.13 

44.53 

2 ; 800 

38.2 

2.75 

40.95 

2; 700 

33.0 

3.50 

36.50 

2,600 

28.8 

3.98 

33.16 

2; 500 

24.7 

4.78 

29.49 





















































































I 


84 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Estimate (e).—Etowah River storage reservoir. 
[Spillway at elevation 870. Estimate of cost of project.] 



Unit price. 

Total. 

338,000 cubic yards Cyclopean concrete masonry. 

.$4.95 

6.00 

8.00 

25.00 

40.00 

52,000.00 

.50 

2.00 

1.00 

.30 

.06 

1 ,000.00 
20 ,000.00 

$1,673,100.00 
99,000.00 
60,000.00 
320,000.00 
340,000.00 
390,000.00 
132,500. 00 
46,000. 00 
7, 400.00 
57,300.00 
39,000.00 
12 ,000.00 
80,000.00 
200 ,000.00 
180,000.00 
363,630. 00 

16,500 cubic yards concrete in core walls. 

7,500 acres of submerged land. 

12,800 acres of submerged land. 

8,500 acres of submerged land. 

7^5 miles of W. & A. and L. & N. R. R. track revision. 

265,000 cubic yards excavation in spillway. 

23,000 cubic yards rock excavation in foundation. 

7,400 cubic yards earth excavation in core wall. 

191,000 cubic yards earth embankments. 

650^000 pounds cast-steel discharge pipe. 

Twelve 72-inch hvdraulic valves. 

4 miles of material track. 

Protection, removal, or purchase of industrial plants. 

Revision of roads, new roads, bridges, etc. 


Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. 


Total. 



3,999,930.00 




Estimate (/).— Tallapoosa storage reservoir No. 1. 
[131-foot dam. Elevation of spillway, 470; top of dam, 480.] 



Unit cost. 

Total. 

138,800 cubic yards Cyclopean concrete masonry. 

$6. 25 

$867,500.00 
482,000.00 
22,000.00 
95,400.00 
45 000.00 

24,100 acres submerged lands. 

20.00 

11,000 cubic yards rock excavation in foundation. 

2.00 

127,200 cubic yards earth excavation in foundation. 

.75 

Damage to industrial plants. 

Revision of roads, new roads, bridges, etc. 


55,000.00 

300,000 pounds cast-steel discharge pipe. 

.06 

18,000.00 

Six 72-inch hvdraulic valves. 

1,000.00 

6,000.00 
159,090.00 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. 



Total. 


1,749,990.00 




Estimate (/) I. —Tallapoosa River storage reservoir , Dam No. 2 . 
[Elevation of spillway, 790; top of dam, 800.] 


• - - 

Unit 

price. 

Total. 

165,500 cubic yards Cyclopean concrete masonry. 

$5.88 

15.00 

2.00 

.25 

.06 

1,000. 00 

$973,140 
103,500 
51,300 
2,000 
18,000 
6,000 
10,000 
50,000 
121,394 

6,900 acres of submerged lands.’. 

25,650 cubic yards rock excavation in foundation. 

8,000 cubic yards earth excavation for embankments. 

300,000 pounds cast-steel discharge pipe. 

Six 72-ihch hydraulic valves.1 .*. 

Damage to industrial plants. 

Cost of bridges, changes in roads, etc. 


Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. 


Total. 


1,335,334 




Estimate (g).—Conasauga River storage reservoir. 
[Elevation of spillway, 1,110; top of dam, 1,120. Estimate of cost of project.] 



Unit 

cost. 

Total cost. 

173,400 cubic yards Cyclopean concrete masonry. 

$4. 80 
40.00 
.60 
1.00 
.06 

1,000.00 

$832,320 
68,000 
43,680 
12,800 
12,000 
4,000 
20,000 
50,000 
104,280 

1,700 acres of submerged land.. 

72,800 cubic yards excavation in spillway. 

12,800 cubic yards rock excavation in spillway. 

200,000 pounds steel discharge pipe. 

Four 72-inch hydraulic valves. 

Revision of roads, new roads, etc. 

Damage to lumber company’s railway. 


Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. 


Total. 


1,147,080 

























































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

Appendix K. 

Letter of Coosa River Improvement Association. 


85 


Coosa River Improvement Association, 

Gadsden, Ala., December 10, 1909. 

Dear Sir: I hand you herewith various resolutions, pledges, and statements as to 
commerce that may be considered absolutely sure immediately upon completion of 
the project for opening the Coosa River from Rome to the Gulf. 

Very respectfully, 


Capt. II. B. Ferguson, 

Corps of Engineers. 


W. P. Lay, President. 


Letter of Mr. J. R. Cantrell. 

City Clerk’s Office, 

Rome, Ga ., November 27, 1909. 

This is to certify that at a regular meeting of the City Council of Rome, Ga., held 
on November 8, 1909, a formal resolution was passed commending the agitation look¬ 
ing toward the opening of the Coosa River to navigation from Rome to the Gulf of 
Mexico, and pledging itself to construct and maintain adequate wharf and wharf facil¬ 
ities on the river front in Rome on the property owned by the city and now used as a 
wharf so soon as the United States Government should improve the Coosa River with 
a through channel to the Gulf. 

To the above intent the city council pledges the good faith of the city, agreeing to 
erect and maintain modern wharf or wharves, well equipped, using such appliances, 
conveyors, and elevators as are approved and as will best facilitate the handling of 
commerce at said wharves and to connect with the same by electric or steam railways 
for the handling of freights. 

J. R. Cantrell, Cleric of Council. 


Letter of Manufacturers and Merchants’ Association of Floyd County, Ga. 


Manufacturers and Merchants’ Association of Floyd County, Ga., 

Rome, Ga., November 27, 1909. 

Dear Sir: We realize that the growth and progress of Rome would be very mate¬ 
rially benefited by the opening of the Coosa River from Rome to the Gulf of Mexico. 

The present restricted mileage of the river, on which navigation is impossible, 
necessarily restricts the commerce that can be profitably carried on the river. We 
can not figure where investment in steamers and barges on the Coosa under the present 
conditions would prove profitable to investors, but we do see that it would be very 
profitable, owing to the assured large volume of business in case the channel is opened 
for through navigation to the Gulf. 

We, the undersigned, do therefore agree and propose that at such time as the chan¬ 
nel is opened for through navigation from Rome to Mobile, Ala., we will build or 
cause to be built, and operate or cause to be operated, a packet line of at least two 
steamboats and at least five barges. 

J. A. Rounsaville. 

Cary J. King. 

J. N. King. 

H. S. McCleskey. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 

President Coosa River Development Association, Gadsden, Ala. 


Letter of Rome & Northern Railroad Co. 

Rome & Northern Railroad Co., 

Rome, Ga., November 30, 1909. 

Dear Sir: We are smelting at our furnace 100 tons of pig iron a day. In case the 
Coosa River is opened to a depth of 6 feet from Rome to Mobile, no doubt that half of 
this pig iron at least will go to Mobile by water. 

It is my understanding that the opening of this river will develop an immense coal 
field in Alabama. In the event this is done we will also use about 60,000 tons per 





86 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


year of this coal. In addition to the above we are owners of a large tract of timber 
which we will be glad to ship by water if the facilities are such as will justify it. We 
are also the heaviest buyers of raw material and merchandise in this section and would 
be glad to have as much of our supply as practicable consigned by water. 

Our interest here represents a large furnace, the R. G. Peters Mining Co., the Rome 
& Northern Railroad, and two sawmills. We are adding to this every month, and if 
modern wharves are constructed at Rome, we will of course be glad to connect our 
railroad to them. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

Rome & Northern Railroad Co., 
By H.H. Shackleton. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 

President Coosa River Development Association , Gadsden, Ala. 


Resolution of the City Council of Gadsden, Ala. 

Whereas the benefits to be received by the people of the city of Gadsden and sur¬ 
rounding country, as well as by the people living all along the Coosa and Alabama 
Rivers, in the proposed improvement of said rivers for navigation to the Gulf, are 
manifold and well understood: Therefore be it 

Resolved by the mayor and board of aldermen of the city of Gadsden , That it is the de¬ 
clared purpose of the city, and it hereby pledges itself, to construct and maintain 
adequate wharf and wharf facilities on the river front in Gadsden on the property 
owned by it, and now used by it as a wharf, so soon as the United States Government 
shall progress with said river improvement to that extent that a through channel is 
available, and that the city will forever erect and maintain adequate wharf and wharf 
facilities to meet the demands of commerce on said river, the good faith of the city 
being hereby pledged to erect and maintain modern, well-equipped wharves, using 
such appliances, conveyers, and elevators as are approved and as will best facilitate 
the handling of commerce at said wharf, and to connect with the same electric or 
steam railway, or both. 

I, R. M. Wilbanks, city clerk of the city of Gadsden, Ala., hereby certify that the 
foregoing attached is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the city council 
in session November 19, 1909. 

I hereunto set my hand and affix the city seal, this the 26th day of November, 1909. 

R. M. Wilbanks, City Clerk . 


Letter of the Wilpicoba Clay Works. 

Wilpicoba Clay Works, 
Ragland, Ala., November 25, 1909. 

Dear Sir: In regard to opening the Coosa River to through navigation to the Gulf, 
which is the splendid purpose of your association, allow me to assure you of my hearty 
cooperation in any way that I may be of assistance in influencing this improvement. 
I am engaged in the manufacture of vitrified paving and commercial brick, and the 
need of water transportation for the marketing of our products is a serious daily en¬ 
counter with us. Our only outlet from Ragland is one railroad, the Seaboard Air Line, 
and although we are making a superior grade of brick, and because of the juxtaposition 
of our fuel and shale supplies are enabled to manufacture at a lower cost, we are handi¬ 
capped by the lack of a low freight rate, which renders us unable to compete with other 
concerns of certain localities. The economic location of the manufacturing plant 
should be governed by its source of supply, but in our case, at least, it is governed by 
railroads alone. 

We have recently filled an order for 400,000 paving bricks for Bradentown, Fla., on 
which we could have made a material saving had we had an open river to the Gulf. 
At present Jacksonville, Fla., is in the market for 4,000,000 or 5,000,000 paving bricks. 
We will have to lose this order on account of the lower rate of the water haul from New 
York, from where they -will be supplied. There is also at present a demand for 
10,000,000 paving bricks in Cuba on which we are unable to compete because we have 
no water rates. We have recently been compelled to miss an order for about 1,000,000 
paving bricks at Key West, on the same account. There are innumerable other con¬ 
tracts which we have had to forego, and you can therefore easily see what the opening 




ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVEBS. 87 

of the Coosa River to the Gulf would mean to us and to the many other industries in 
our same condition. 

The total output of our plant at present is 25,000 vitrified paving bricks per day, and 
40.000 common commercial bricks. We are, however, making improvements that 
will increase this capacity in the near future to at least 30,000 paving and 50,000 
common bricks. The aggregate tonnage of this output will be 150 tons per day, the 
greater part of which would go to the river were it opened to through navigation. 

The benefit of an open river, as you can see, would be incalculable to us, and in 
consideration of this benefit, if the Government will give us this water route, I pledge 
myself and my company to construct and maintain, at or near Ragland, adequate 
wharf and wharf facilities to meet the demands of commerce, the same to be 
equipped with modern appliances as will best serve in loading, unloading, and 
transfer of freights, and to connect with the same by steam or electric railway. 

I will further construct, or cause to be constructed, at least one boat and four 200-ton 
barges which will be operated by the company in marketing our products. This 
wharf will be constructed for the use of our company in addition to and irrespective 
of any other wharf that may be constructed by the city of Ragland, or other local 
industries. The above named wharf and vessels will be built and put into use as soon 
as the Government shall have progressed far enough with the improvement to make 
a through channel of sufficient depth available. 

Very truly, yours, C. H. Pittman, 

Vice President and General Manager. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 

Chairman Coosa River Improvement Association, 

Gadsden, Ala. 


Letter oe Ragland Coal Co. 


Ragland Coal Co., 
Ragland, Ala., October SO, 1909. 

Dear Sir: In the matter of the improvement of the Coosa River, which the associa¬ 
tion is so ably striving to obtain, allow me to proffer my full support and hearty cooper¬ 
ation in the furtherance of this great work. In my opinion this is the most vital of the 
commercial interests of this State. In the opening of this waterway to through naviga¬ 
tion to the Gulf is the one economic way of opening to the world our great store of 
agricultural and mineral wealth. 

I am engaged in the development of the coal interests of this section, the deposits of 
which are almost inexhaustible. Our company is at present dependent upon one 
railroad for marketing off its product. Our total output will be about 2,000 tons per 
day. and it is no hard matter to reckon what the difference would be if we had advan¬ 
tages, like the Pittsburgh district, of a water course for its.transportation. I have 
long been aware of the benefits to accrue from this source. 

If the Government should decide to make this improvement, both the navigation 
and the water power thus developed would be of inestimable value to the State and 
to the whole South, and the Coosa Valley would unquestionably be one of the most 
attractive locations in the world for all kinds of manufacturing industries. 

In this connection let me say that in consideration of the benefits to my company 
to be derived from this improvement, if the Government will open the river to 
through navigation to the Gulf, I hereby pledge myself and company to construct, or 
cause to be constructed, at our river landing at Ragland a modern wharf, equipped 
with the best approved appliances for loading, unloading, and transfer for freights, 
with steam or electric railroad connection. That I will construct, or cause to be 
constructed, and myself operate at least 1 towboat of the best design for the purposei 
and 10 barges of 200-ton capacity. I pledge the good faith of myself and the company 
that this work shall be completed as soon as we shall have an adequate open channel 
over which to transport our freights to the Gulf. . 

In conclusion let me urge you and the association to do everything possible to gam 
material recognition from Congress. 

Yours, very truly, Ragland < oal ( o., 

W. T. Brown, 

President and General Manager. 

Mr. W. P. Lay. . . ^ J J 

Chairman Coosa River Improvement Association, Gadsden, Ala. 



88 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 
Letter of Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co. 


Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co., 

Nazareth , Pa., November 27 , 1909. 

Dear Sir: Referring to the matter of the improvement of the Coosa River, which 
has been under discussion between us, allow me to 'express my interest and pledge 
my earnest support in this great work. I am a supporter of the policy to improve our 
inland waterways, and am eagerly enthusiastic over the project to make the Coosa 
River system one of the first of these to receive attention. In the first place, I am 
of the opinion—and I have given the matter careful study—that a through channel 
to the Gulf over the Coosa and Alabama Rivers will open to the world an enormous 
store of mineral and agricultural wealth, possible for any river or system of rivers in 
the United States. In the second place, such a water route concerns me vitally, fori 
expect to contribute largely to the tonnage that would make its.commerce. 

I am president of the Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co., which is just completing 
a million-dollar plant for this purpose at Ragland, Ala. With the opening of the 
Panama Canal, if we had water transportation, our market would extend to the Pacific 
coast., to the Atlantic coast, and to all points in Central and South America. I feel 
sure that we would immediately find it necessary to double the output of the plant 
now under construction by building another of equal or of greater size. 

The plant now nearing completion is situated on the river, and will manufacture 
annually 1,000,000 barrels of Portland cement, aggregating 200,000 tons, and valued at 
$1,000,000. If the Government will take up this work and give us a through channel 
for water transportation to the Gulf, I will guarantee to turn to the river at least 200,000 
tons of freight per annum, either by putting it into the hands of some common carrier 
for transport, or by myself constructing, or causing to be constructed and operated, 
boats and barges sufficient to such needs. I will further, and I do hereby pledge 
myself and my company to construct, or cause to be constructed, a modern wharf at 
Ragland, Ala., equipped with the best approved appliances for the loading, unloading, 
transfer, and proper storage of freights, and to connect with the same by electric or 
steam railway. 

The above agreement is made in good faith, and shall be considered binding, the 
pledge of myself and my company being hereby made to proceed with the fulfillment 
of the agreement as soon as the Government shall have so far progressed with the work 
of improvement that a through channel is available. 

I heartily recommend the work of your association in this great enterprise, and sin¬ 
cerely hope that you may obtain material support from the present Congress. 

Very truly, yours, 


Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co. 
Wm. B. Shaffer, President. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 


Chairman Coosa River Improvement Association , Gadsden , Ala. 


Letter of Mr. W. H. Hassinger. 

Birmingham, Ala., November , 22, 1909. 

Dear Sir: In reply to your letter of the 18th as to the probable commerce the South¬ 
ern Iron & Steel Co. could, or would, throw to the Coosa River when it is opened to 
through navigation to the Gulf, I would state that this is, of course, more or less prob¬ 
lematic. Our plant, when completed, will have an initial tonnage of 500 tons daily. 
As the plants become operative this will increase from time to time and in a short 
while will be doubled. As to what proportion of this product would go down by 
river it is quite impossible to say, but I will say that as a greater portion of this tonnage 
will go to the Southwest the initial route from Gadsden to Gulf ports would undoubt¬ 
edly be so favorable as to warrant a large portion being shipped that way. By the time 
the Panama Canal is opened up our plants will have undoubtedly attained then' maxi¬ 
mum tonnage and will call for additional products, the demand for which will be prac¬ 
tically unlimited. While we can not guarantee any definite tonnage it does look as 
if this would be the natural outlet for our products. 

Trusting this gives you the desired information, and with kindest regards, I remain, 
Very truly, yours, 

W. H. Hassinger, President. 

Capt. W. P. Lay, 

Chairman of the Coosa River Improvement Association , Gadsden, Ala. 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 
Letter of Alabama Marble Co. 


89 


Alabama Marble Co., 

Gantts Quarry, Ala., October 27, 1909. 

Dear Sir: Referring to the matter of the Coosa River improvements, which has 
been the subject of correspondence between us, I desire to lay before you the follow¬ 
ing facts, in reference to the business of this company and the bearing the improve¬ 
ment of the river would have upon it. 

At the present time, we are considerably handicapped by the existing freight rates 
in doing business with the eastern part of the United States, which is a very large 
market for marble. We have carefully investigated the question, and do not believe 
we can ever secure any material reduction, as long as we have an all-rail haul. If we 
had an all-water haul, there is no question whatever that the freight rate could be re¬ 
duced to less than 50 per cent of what it is now. If that could be done, we would 
undertake to sell along the Atlantic coast of the United States at least 1,000,000 cubic 
feet of marble per year. In order to handle this business there would have to be, 
either in our possession or in the possession of some common carrier, a fleet of at least 
five 500-ton barges, which would be busy all the time either in carrying marble away 
from the quarry or bringing supplies to it. If no common carrier went into the busi¬ 
ness of operating such barges we would do it ourselves, because the business would 
justify it. 

There is no question whatever, with the river open all the way from Gadsden to 
the Gulf, we could and would develop this business. 

In addition to that we would be in a very favorable location with reference to the 
West Indies, to the east and west coasts of South America, to Mexico, and, after the 
completion of the Panama Canal, to our own Pacific coast. 

There is no doubt whatever that we could develop at least as great a business with 
these localities as we could with the eastern part of our own country. This would 
simply double the amount of freight to be handled, taking a fleet of 10 500-ton barges, 
which would be busy all the time, with the marble business of this company alone. 

With this company developing such a business there is no question whatever that 
many other marble companies would spring into existence, because in Talladega 
County there is an inexhaustible quantity of white marble of the same character as 
that which we are quarrying at Gantts Quarry. It is absolutely impossible for any 
one concern to monopolize this entire deposit. The other concerns would undoubtedly 
come into existence, and no doubt, in time, would develop just as good a business as 
we would. 

We would be practically safe in promising that if the river were opened to naviga¬ 
tion, as stated, that the exploitation of the marble deposits of Talladega County alone 
would be sufficient to furnish sufficient and adequate employment for the entire plant 
of a large transportation company. 

Of course what the other resources of the country would furnish in the way of freight 
you can get from other sources better than you can from me, although from my own 
observations I think that the marble would be one of the small items. However, I 
am of the opinion that the marble business in Talladega County will ultimately 
develop, without the assistance of the river, to something like $10,000,000 per year. 

With the assistance of an open river I have no doubt whatever it would soon reach 
a volume of $30,000,000 per year. 

Under these circumstances I think it is the duty of every citizen of this part of 
the country to do all that he can to induce Congress to adopt the scheme for improv¬ 
ing the river for both power and navigation. In reference to power I have said noth¬ 
ing, but if there were an adequate power development along the Coosa River we 
would undoubtedly buy all of our power instead of generating it ourselves; so would 
almost anybody else who started a manufacturing industry in this section. 

As far as the" marble deposit is concerned I have no doubt that it will ultimately 
furnish a market for probably 25,000 or 30,000 horsepower. While the total power 
available on the Coosa River is much larger than this, still it is quite an appreciable 
part of the whole. 

Under all of the circumstances I think we are all thoroughly justified in appealing 
to Congress to put this project through just as soon as possible. 

Very truly, yours, 

John Stephen Seweli^ 

Vice President and General Manager Alabama Marble Co. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 

Chairman Coosa River Improvement Association, Gadsden, Ala. 


90 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEES. 

Letter of Massachusetts Mills in Georgia. 

Massachusetts Mills in Georgia, 

Lindale, Floyd County , Ga., November 24, 1909. 

Dear gnu In regard to the opening of the Coosa River from Rome, I wish to say 
that I consider it a matter of the most vital importance for the textile industry in 
the South, especially in view of the fact that the Panama Canal will soon be open. 

The majority of the cotton mills in the South are on export goods and now have 
to send their products transcontinental at a high rate of freight or ship to New York, 
whereas if the Coosa River opens we can concentrate our goods in Rome, ship direct 
to Mobile, and from there to the East; besides, the opening of the Coosa River would 
necessarily affect our freight rate here to New England and other points, as it would 
give us a water rate. 

We ship in normal times 200 tons of cotton-factory products a week, a great bulk 
of which—in fact, three-quarters—is for the South American, India, and Chinese 
markets. With the proper facilities and the proper rate you can very readilv see 
the advantage it would be to this mill to have the Coosa opened and ship that way. 

Yours, truly, 

H. P. Meikleham, Agent. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, 

President Coosa River Development Association, Gadsden, Ala. 


Atmospheric Nitrogen. 

The following list of atmospheric-nitrogen plants using the cyanamid process is 
issued by the Niagara Falls Co.: 


Name. 


Cyanid Gesellschaft. 

Deutsche Carbid, A. O. 

Gesellschaft fur Stickstoffdunger. 

Northwestern Cyanamide Co. 

Ostdeutsche Kalkstickstoffwerke und Chem. Fabriken. 

Societa Italiana del Carburo di Calcio. 

Societa Suisse des Produits Azotes. 

Societa Italiana per la Fabbr. di Prod. Azat. 

Societe Frangaise des Produits Azotes. 

Societa Piedmontese del Carburo di Calcio. 

Company not yet named. 

American Cyanamid Co. 

Total. 


Location. 

Annual 

capacity. 

Trostberg, Germany. 

Tons. 

40,000 
25,000 
10,000 

Knapsack, Germany. 

Westeregein, Germany. 

Odde, Norway. 

30'000 

I Muhlthal, Germany. 

8 ; 000 
15,000 
15,000 
25,000 
15,000 
8,000 
30,000 
10,000 

Collestate, Italy. 

1 Martigny, Switzerland. 

! Piano d’ Orta, Italy. 

Notre Dame de Briancon, France. 

St. Marcel, Italy. 

Japan_'_!. 

Niagara Falls, Ontario. 


L. 

231,000 


One of the chief uses of atmospheric nitrogen is for fertilizer. The following data 
concerning the market for same was compiled by the Ashepoo Fertilizer Co., Charles¬ 
ton, S. C.: 


Estimated [consumption of manufactured fertilizers, based upon information furnished 
by the agricultural departments of the several States named. 


States. 

Estimated tonnage 
consumed. 

1901-2 

1907-8 

Kentucky. 

45,000.00 

G) 

G) 

77.857.90 
240,000.00 

58,286.16 
326,256.00 

45.792.90 
184,295.00 
302,335.00 
432,912.52 

40,000.00 
46,384.00 
0 ) 

137,831.95 
240,000.00 
107,226.00 
507,842.00 
71,505.40 
312,470.00 
565,885.00 
757,286.50 

Tennessee. 

Arkansas. 

Mississippi. 

Virginia... 

Florida. 

North Carolina. 

Louisiana. 

Alabama. 

South Carolina. 

Georgia. 

Total. 

1,712,735.48 

2,786,430.85 


1 None given. 


Estimated increase in 10 States, 1,073,695.37. 






























































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVERS. 91 

The following notes are from Daily Consular and Trade Reports, issued by the De¬ 
partment of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures: 

WATER POWER WANTED FOR AIR-NITRATE FACTORIES. 

Representatives of European interests manufacturing air nitrates by hydroelectric 
power for fertilizers are in the United States to see what can be done in the way of 
securing large water powers for establishing such factories in this country. An indus¬ 
try of this kind is needed, as the imports of Chilean nitrate of soda now amount to 
$14,000,000 a year. Difficulty is being experienced, however, in securing suitable 
water powers at reasonable cost. Governments of other countries are said to be offer¬ 
ing inducements for the location of the extensive nitrate mills which the company 
proposes to erect. (Report dated Mar. 12, 1909.) 

TRANSVAAL POWER UTILIZATION—PROPOSED ERECTION OF A SECOND HYDROELECTRIC 

STATION. 

Consul Edwin N. Gunsaulus, of Johannesburg, writes that in addition to the great 
scheme for supplying power to the Rand, a new company, to be known as the Pre¬ 
toria Power Co., is being formed to supply power and to manufacture at a hydro¬ 
electric station on Crocodile River, nitrate of lime and nitric acid. Three large 
banks in Europe are said to be supplying the capital. For the initial works, which 
are to furnish 20,000 to 25,000 horsepower, $3,469,875 will be required, and for the 
nitrate of lime and nitric acid works $1,250,000 additional will be necessary. The 
present cost of nitrate of soda delivered to South African ports is about $54 per ton, 
while nitrate of lime, which serves the same purpose as a fertilizer, can be produced 
and sold, it is said, at half of that price in the Transvaal. There is considerable de¬ 
mand for nitric acid in South Africa for use in the manufacture of dynamite for mining 
purposes. (Report dated Aug. 25, 1909.) 

AIR NITRATES IN GERMANY-TWO SYSTEMS ARE EMPLOYED IN THEIR MANUFACTURE. 

Consul General A. M. Thackara, of Berlin, answers as follows the queries of an 
American correspondent regarding the manufacture of ah - nitrates and the status of 
farming in Germany: 

“Atmospheric nitrogen is utilized in making nitrates for fertilizing purposes, in 
accordance with two general systems in Germany, as well as in Norway, Italy, and 
other European countries, and in Canada. (1) The formation of the so-called calca¬ 
reous nitrogen (kalckstickstoff), which has the chemical formula Ca (CN) N, and 
which is formed by passing nitrogen over heated calcium carbide or through a heated 
mixture of lime and charcoal, and (2) the direct combination of the elements in the 
air—oxygen and nitrogen—by the use of the electric spark and the formation of nitrate 
by bringing these combinations into contact with the proper calcium or other com¬ 
ponents. 

‘ ‘ There are several processes by means of which the nitrogen, which combines with 
the calcium carbide in the formation of calcareous nitrogen, is separated from the 
oxygen of the air. One is by passing air over the copper coils, by means of which 
the oxygen is removed. Another process is to obtain free nitrogen by the partial 
evaporation of liquefied air. The great expense attending this latter process renders 
it impracticable, and the nitrogen so obtained is still much mixed with oxygen com¬ 
pounds. Nitrogen is also obtained by one German firm in Hamburg and Hanover 
by cooling the gases of combustion and removing the impurities by passing the gases 
through retorts filled with copper and copper oxides, and then through some sub¬ 
stance that absorbs the carbon dioxide. 

Qualities of product—second system .—The so-called calcareous nitrogen obtained by 
the various processes is a grayish substance containing about 20 per cent nitrogen. 
As a fertilizer it is generally supposed to be as efficient as ammonium sulphate, and 
but little inferior to saltpeter. The exact effect of the cyanide in the compound is 
as yet not understood. By heating, the whole of the nitrogen in the compound is 
changed into ammonia, from which ammonium sulphate may be formed. The prac¬ 
ticability of the production of calcareous nitrogen depends upon cheap power supply, 
and hence the plants are generally located where water power is available. The 
substance is produced in many different countries and the estimated total production 
for 1908 was about 45,000 tons. 

The second system by which nitrates are obtained by the direct combination of 
the oxygen and nitrogen of the air is much more recent in its development than the- 


92 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 


above. After numerous attempts had been made in various countries, the Nor¬ 
wegian inventors, Birkeland and Eyde, finally succeeded in making the process 
industrially practicable (described in a monograph on “Manufacture of Air-Nitrates,” 
recently published by the Bureau of Manufactures). According to their system, the 
end of each of the electric poles through which a current is passing is exposed to the 
action of a magnet which causes the electric spark to spread out into a disklike flame. 
This flame is surrounded by some material that resists combustion, thus leaving a 
disk-shaped inclosure through which the atmosphere is sucked. As the temperature 
at which this reaction takes place is very high and as the atmosphere passes compar¬ 
atively rapidly through the flame, only from 1 to 2 per cent of the elements in the air 
is transformed. The compounds formed begin to decompose when their temperature 
is lowered, and therefore methods are devised to rapidly decrease their temperature 
to the point at which they can form more stable products. For this purpose the com¬ 
pounds are passed through an evaporation apparatus, and after their temperature has 
been reduced to about 50 degrees Reaumur they are passed into an oxidation chamber 
and oxidized into nitrogen dioxid, from which the nitrates are made. The farthest 
advance in this system has been made in Norway, principally by the firm of Birke¬ 
land & Eyde, and in factories located at Notodden, Svalgfos, and Christiansand. A 
similar system in Germany is used at the “Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik” at 
Ludwigshafen and Rhein. The nitrates so formed are quite pure and have thus far 
been consumed principally in the industries, only a small quantity having been 
used as fertilizers. 

Cost of 'production—works of reference. —The cost and the volume of production of 
each system depend upon the availability of cheap power, and the production of 
calcareous nitrogen also depends upon the prices at which lime and coal or charcoal 
are available. One estimate places the cost of the production of calcareous nitrogen 
containing 20 per cent nitrogen at 270 to 315 francs ($52.11 to $60.79) per metric ton 
(2,204.6 pounds). This would make the nitrogen in the compound cost 26 to 30 cents 
a kilo (2.2 pounds), while the cost of the nitrogen in compounds formed by the direct 
combination of the elements in the air is generally conceded to be less. The experi¬ 
ments made with fertilizers of either system, in comparison with Chilean saltpeter, 
are generally favorable to the artificial product. In sandy soil the calcium nitrate 
formed by the direct combination of the elements in the air brought even better 
result^ than the Chilean saltpeter. 

A description and illustrations of the mechanical devices in use in the electrical 
system of producing atmospheric nitrogen is published by one Witt in Das neue 
Technisch-Chemische Institut for 1906, which may be procured for 2 marks ($0,476) 
at the Weidmanns’che Buclihandlung, Zimmer-Str. 94, Berlin, and a cursory descrip¬ 
tion of the various processes in use in both systems, as well as the numbers of the 
various patents covering the same is given in Stahl und Eisen for May 19, 1909, pub¬ 
lished in Dusseldorf. Copies of the German patents may be procured" at 1 to 2 marks 
each ($0,238 to $0,476) through an American or a German patent attorney. 

Another book giving an exhaustive description of the technical and industrial appli¬ 
cation of atmospheric nitrogen is issued by Drs. Donath and Frenzel of the Tech¬ 
nical High School at Brunn, and can be obtained from the book dealer A. Seydel, 
Koniggratzer-Str. 31, Berlin. The price of this book is 7 marks ($1.67).” (Report 
Hated Dec. 13, 1909.) 


Appendix L. 

The Code of Alabama. 

[Adopted by act of the Legislature of Alabama; approved July 27, 1907.] 

Article 2, page 1477.—Easement and right to construct dams, 6148-6150. 

Sec. 6148. Easement and right to con- Sec. 6149. Eminent domain, improve- 
struct dams across navigable streams. ment of navigation. 

Sec. 6150. Prior rights. 

6148. Easement and right to construct dams across navigable rivers. —Any person, 
firm, or corporation organized for the purpose of improving the navigation upon a 
navigable river in the State of Alabama, and of developing in connection therewith 
a water power thereof by a dam and lock, or a system of dams and locks, and elec¬ 
trically transmitting and distributing such power for the use of the public, which shall 
have acquired the necessary lands upon both sides of said river to the extent of at 




ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


93 


least one more than half of the necessary abutment sites for the said dam or system 
of dams, and lock or system of locks, and shall have been organized or incorporated 
for the specific and particular purpose of improving the navigation of and developing 
water power in connection with a particular and specified river, and has prepared 
plans for the construction of a dam or system of dams and a lock or system of locks 
appertaining thereto, and filed a copy of said plans in the office of the secretary of 
state of Alabama, together with a certified copy of its articles of incorporation (if a 
corporation), which provide both for the improvement of navigation of such river and 
for the development of the full water power of the same over the stretch of river thus 
to be improved, shall have authority to construct a dam or system of dams with a lock 
or system of locks appertaining thereto in such river, for the improvement of navi¬ 
gation of said river by one or more slack-water pools, due to the construction of said 
dam or dams and the development of water power in connection therewith, and to that 
end and in consideration of the benefits to the public by reason of the improvement 
of navigation of such river and the development of water power thereof, as herein 
provided, is hereby granted an easement for power purposes to and in the waters and 
bed of the river in which dam or system of dams and lock or system of locks are to be 
constructed for the full area covered by the slack-water pool or pools which will be 
created by the construction of the said dam or system of dams to the extent necessary 
for the developing the full power of said river over that length of same upon which 
navigation is to be unproved as provided herein, and for providing suitable and con¬ 
venient sites for the said dam or system of dams, lock, power houses, and other fea¬ 
tures appurtenant thereto and necessary for navigation and power purposes, or for 
either of them, and to the extent made necessary by the impounding, diversion, 
and conversion of the said waters as the same may be caused by the construction of 
said dam or system of dams, or by any other change from the normal state of the said 
river due to said construction and necessary for the purpose of deriving the energy 
therefrom. 

6149. Eminent domain , improvement of navigation. —Any such person, firm, or cor¬ 
poration may exercise the power of eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring 
such lands as it may be necessary or convenient to flood or otherwise utilize in order 
to improve navigation as provided in this article, such lands to include, as well as 
all the area submerged, a strip of land 50 feet in width bordering upon the margins 
of the slack-water pool or pools as the same may be defined at the highest stage of the 
river at any time after the completion of the improvements herein provided for. and 
the right hereby conferred to exercise such power of eminent domain is cumulative. 
No person, firm, or corporation shall acquire the rights by this article granted unless 
the dam, or system of dams, and lock, or system of locks, to be constructed by such 
person, firm, or corporation are so planned as, when constructed, will by the opera¬ 
tion thereof improve the navigation of the river in which the dam, or system of dams, 
lock, or system of locks, are to be built, and will develop the full power of such river 
over the length of same upon which navigation is to be improved as provided in this 
article: Provided, that such person, firm, or corporation shall commence work upon 
said dam, or system of dams, and lock, or system of locks, within five years from the 
date of securing the consent of the Federal Government to do so, and shall complete 
the same within the time prescribed by the United States Government: Provided 
further , That no foreign corporation shall acquire the rights granted under this article 
until it has complied with the laws of Alabama with reference to foreign corporations. 

6150. Prior rights. —The person, firm, or corporation which first in point of time 
shall have complied with provisions of this article shall be entitled to all the rights 
and privileges herein granted, and the operation of this section shall be retroactive. 


Memorandum No. 1. 

Cost of Steam Power. 

[From Water Power Engineering, by Mead ] 

Table LV shows the capital costs of steam-power plants of various capacities and 
the annual cost of power per brake horsepower as estimated by the Ontario Hydro- 
Electric Power Commission. Similar costs for producer gas power are shown in Table 
LVI from the same source, and the commission’s estimate of the effect on the cost 
of power of variations in the price of coal is shown in Table LVII. 



94 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table LV. —Showing capital costs of steam plants installed and annual costs of power 

per brake horsepower. 


Size of plant (horsepower). 

Capital cost of plant per horse¬ 
power installed. 

Annual cost 
of 10-hour 
power per 
brake 

horsepower. 

Annual cost 
of 24-hour 
power per 
brake 

horsepower. 

Engines, 
boilers, etc., 
installed. 

Buildings. 

Total. 

Class I .—Engines: Simple, slide-valve, non¬ 
condensing. Boilers: Return tubular. 






10. 

$66.00 

$40.00 

$106.00 

$91.16 

$180.76 

20. 

56.00 

37.00 

93.00 

76.31 

151.48 

30. 

48.70 

35.00 

83.70 

66.46 

131.68 

40. 

44.75 

33.50 

78.25 

59.46 

117.74 

50. 

43.00 

31.00 

74.00 

53.95 

106. 46 

Class II.— Engines: Simple, Corliss, non¬ 
condensing. Boilers: Return tubular. 






30. 

70.70 

35.00 

105. 70 

61.14 

117. 70 

40. 

62.85 

33.50 

96.35 

55.50 

107.10 

50. 

59.00 

31.00 

90.00 

50.70 

97. 73 

60. 

56.00 

30.00 

86.70 

47.42 

91.34 

80. 

50.00 

27.50 

77.50 

43.86 

85.41 

100. 

44.60 

25.00 

69.60 

40.55 

79.19 

Class III.— Engines: Compound, Corliss, 
condensing. Boilers: Return tubular, with 
reserve capacity. 






100. 

63.40 

28.00 

91.40 

33.18 

60.05 

150. 

53.70 

24.00 

77.70 

29.83 

54.63 

200. 

50.10 

20.00 

70.10 

28.14 

51.72 

300. 

45.90 

18.00 

63.90 

26.27 

48.83 

400. 

43.55 

16.00 

59.55 

24.84 

46.12 

500. 

41.25 

14.00 

55.25 

23.73 

44.21 

750. 

40.50 

13.00 

53.50 

23.56 

44.02 

1,000. 

39.00 

12.00 

51.00 

23.26 

43.71 

Class IV.— Engines: Compound, Corliss, 
condensing. Boilers: Water-tube, with 
reserve capacity. 





300. 

55.20 

18.00 

73.20 

25.77 

46.32 

400. 

51.50 

16.00 

67.50 

24.18 

43.61 

500. 

49.40 

14.00 

63.40 

23.19 

42.03 

750. 

46.80 

13.00 

59.70 

22.88 

41.56 

1,000. 

44.30 

12.00 

56.80 

22.47 

41.11 



Note. —Annual costs include interest at 5 per cent, depreciation and repairs on plant, oil and waste, 
labor and fuel (coal at $4 per ton). 

Brake horsepower is the mechanical powder at engine shaft. 

Table LVI .—Showing capital costs of producer gas plants installed and annual costs oj 

power per brake horsepower. 


Size of plant (horsepower). 

p 

Capital cost of plant per horse¬ 
power installed. 

Annual cost 
of 10-hour 
power per 
brake 

horsepower. 

Annual cost 
of 24-hour 
power per 
brake 

horsepower. 

Machinery, 

etc. 

Buildings. 

Total. 

10. 

$137.00 

$40.00 

$177.00 

$53.48 

$90.02 

20. 

110.00 

36.00 

146.00 

44.47 

75.22 

30. 

93.00 

33.00 

126.00 

38.73 

65.99 

40. 

84.50 

29.00 

113.50 

85.05 

59.85 

50. 

80.00 

26.00 

106.00 

32.27 

55.22 

60. 

79.00 

24.00 

103.00 

30.49 

52.03 

80. 

78.20 

22.00 

100.20 

28.70 

48.95 

100. 

77.50 

20.00 

97.50 

27.05 

45.40 

150. 

76.00 

19.00 

95.00 

25.87 

43.17 

200. 

74.00 

17.00 

91.00 

24.95 

41.78 

300. 

73.00 

16.00 

89.00 

24.24 

40.40 

400. 

71.50 

14.00 

85.50 

23.41 

39.03 

500. 

70.00 

12.00 

82.00 

22.54 

37.54 

750. 

67.50 

10.00 

77.50 

21.55 

35.99 

1,000. 

65.00 

8.00 

73.00 

20.46 

34.66 


Note.—A nnual costs include interest at 5 per cent, depreciation and repairs on plant, oil and waste, 
labor and fuel (bituminous coal at $4 and anthracite coal at $5 per ton). 











































































95 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Table LVII.— Shov ing the effect on the cost of power of a variation in the price of coal 

of 50 cents per ton . 


Size of plant (horsepower). 

Suction pro¬ 
ducer gas. 

Steam. 

10- 

hour. 

24- 

hour. 

Kind of engine. 

10- 

hour. 

24- 

hour. 

10. 

$1.15 

$2.53 


[ $6.14 

$13.47 

20. 

1.13 

2.46 

Simple slide valve. 

{ 5.25 

11.56 

30. 

1.10 

2.40 


4.71 

10.35 

40. 

1.07 

2.33 


3.56 

7.84 

50. 

1.04 

2.29 


3.37 

7.41 

60. 

1.01 

2.24 

■ Simple automatic noncondensing. 

3.26 

7.16 

80. 

.98 

2.18 

3.15 

6.97 

100. 

.96 

2.12 


3.12 

6.87 

150. 

.94 

2.07 


1.75 

3.85 

200. 

.92 

2.02 


1.69 

3.71 

300. 

.90 

1.98 

oompouna conaensing. 

1.62 

3.60 

400. 

.88 

1.94 


1.56 

3.44 

500. 

.86 

1.89 

Compound condensing water- 
tube boilers. 

1.39 

3.05 

750. 

.82 

1.81 

1.39 

3.05 

1,000. 

.76 

1.72 

1.39 

3.05 




Mr. II. A. Foster 1 made actual tests of 22 different power plants, including manu¬ 
facturing establishments, electric-light stations, pumping plants, etc., and deter¬ 
mined for each plant the power consumption per annum and its cost, including not 
only running expenses, but fixed charges. The cost per horsepower per annum 
varied from a minimum of $15.69 to a maximum of $233.95. 


Table LVII I. — Showing average power developed and its cost per horsepower in 22 steam- 

power plants. 


Output. 

Operating 

Fixed 

Total cost 

Cost per 

Average 

horsepower 

developed. 

Number of 
days per 
annum. 

expenses 
per horse¬ 
power. 

. charges 
per horse¬ 
power. 

per horse¬ 
power per 
annum. 

horse¬ 

power- 

hour. 

12.4 

361 

$147.93 

$25.40 

$173.33 

Cents. 

5.648 

20.9 

365 

123.12 

28.42 

151.54 

1.868 

21.5 

361 

90.47 

17.80 

108.27 

2.918 

32.9 

330 

22.56 

5.83 

28.39 

.832 

36.7 

365 

137.25 

96.70 

233.95 

2.811 

42.4 

365 

86.38 

63.20 

149.58 

1.708 

53.0 

309 

56.94 

19.51 

76. 45 

1.596 

58.8 

365 

97.30 

33.82 

131.12 

1.613 

70.4 

365 

101.69 

20.78 

122.45 

1.641 

129.3 

365 

30.14 

9.41 

39.55 

.871 

166.7 

313 

15.19 

4.47 

19.66 

.639 

173.0 

313 

22.66 

5.83 

28.39 

3.333 

210.9 

290 

40.33 

7.86 

48.19 

.693 

296.7 

297 

45.56 

7.81 

53.37 

.749 

926.0 

307 

11.73 

8.77 

20.50 

.691 

1,010.8 

306 

15.70 

7.74 

23.44 

.794 

1,174.8 

306 

10.19 

5.50 

15.69 

.531 

1,278.7 

293 

10.49 

6.23 

16.72 

.590 

1,345.5 

365 

23.28 

9. 42 

32.70 

.820 

1,352.0 

365 

33.03 

29.41 

62.44 

.713 

1,909.7 

306 

13.40 

6.63 

20.03 

.677 

2,422.0 

306 

15.67 

6.73 

22.40 

.757 


Cost of Steam Power. 


[By William O. Webber, in the Engineering Magazine, July, 1908.] 

The cost of water-power rights must be considered, also available space and cost 
thereof for steam plants. The cost of one steam horsepower per brake horsepower 
per year, with simple engines and $2 coal, he makes $62.10. 


i See Trans. Am. Inst. E. E., Vol. 14, p. 385. 






































































9G 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVEBS. 


Actual cost of 1 horsepower per year in several plants. 


Average 

horse¬ 

power. 

Cost of coal 
per ton 
(2,240 
pounds). 

Total 
cost per 
annum. 

Remarks. 

182. 

$3.50 

$57.59 

No land or building cost. 

133. 

3.25 

60.00 

No land cost. 

100. 

3.50 

65.60 

No land or building cost. 

97. 

4.45 

86.80 

All costs included. 

75. 

2.90 

92.40 

No land or building cost. 

50. 

4.75 

111.05 

Do. 

20. 

4.45 

133. 50 

All costs included. 


Cost of 1 steam horsepower per brake horsepower per year (compound condensing engines). 



Size of plant in horsepower. 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

1,000 

1,500 

Cost of plant per horsepower.... 

$170.00 

$146.00 

$126.00 

$110.00 

$96.00 

$60.00 

$58.00 

Fixed charges at 14 per cent.... 

23.80 

20.40 

17.65 

15.40 

13.45 

8.40 

8.12 

Coal per horsepower per hour... 

7.00 

6.50 

6.00 

5.50 

5.00 

2.50 

2.00 

Cost of fuel at $4 per ton. 

38.50 

35. 70 

33.00 

32.00 

27.50 

13.75 

11.00 

Attendance, 10-hour basis. 

12.00 

10.00 

8.60 

7.25 

6.20 

3.50 

3.25 

Oil, waste, and supplies. 

2.40 

2.00 

1.72 

1.45 

1.24 

.70 

.65 

Total. 

76.70 

68.10 

60.97 

56.10 

48.39 

26.35 

23.02 

Coal, at $5 per ton. 

86.40 

77.10 

69.22 

61.90 

55.29 

29.80 

25.77 

Coal, at $4.50 per ton. 

81.50 

72.60 

65.07 

58.10 

51.79 

28.05 

24.39 

Coal, at $4 per ton. 

76. 70 

68.10 

60.97 

56.10 

48.39 

26.35 

23.02 

Coal, at $3.50 per ton. 

71.90 

63.70 

56.82 

50.50 

45.04 

24.60 

21.64 

Coal, at $3 per ton. 

67.00 

59.20 

51.67 

46.70 

41.49 

22.90 

20.27 

Coal, at $2.50 per ton. 

62.30 

54.75 

48.59 

43.00 

38.09 

21.20 

18.89 

Coal, at $2 per ton. 

57.45 

50. 25 

44.47 

40.10 

34.64 

19.47 

17.52 


Cost of 1 steam horsepower per brake horsepower per annum , 308 days (triple condensing 

engines ). 


Size of plant.in horsepower.. 


3,000 


4,000 


5,000 


6,000 

Cost of plant per horsepower. 


$54 


$52 


$50 


$48 

Coal per horsepower hour.. .pounds.. 


1.375 


1.25 


1.125 


1 

Fixed charges, at 14 per cent. 

• 

$7.56 


$7.28 


$7 


$6.72 


10 

24 

10 

24 

10 

24 

10 

24 


hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

hours. 

Fuel, at $4 per ton. 

$7.46 

$14.92 

$6.87 

$13.75 

$6.18 

$12.37 

$5.50 

$11.00 

Attendance, 10-hour basis. 

2.75 

5.50 

2.50 

5.00 

2.25 

4.50 

2.00 

4.00 

Oil, waste, and supplies. 

Total, coal at $4. 

.50 

1.20 

.40 

.96 

.35 

.84 

.30 

.72 

18. 27 

29.18 

17.06 

26.99 

15.79 

24.72 

14.52 

22.44 

Total, coal at $3. 

16.40 

25.45 

15.40 

23.56 

14.24 

21.90 

13.14 

19.69 

Total, coal at $2.50. 

15.47 

23.59 

14.38 

21.84 

13.47 

20.22 

12.46 

18.32 

Total, coal at $2. 

14.54 

21.72 

13.76 

20.12 

12.69 

18.53 

11.77 

16.94 


Cost of Steam Power. 

[By Howard S. Knowlton, in the Engineering Magazine, Februay, 1909.] 
Table 3. —Cost in cents per kilowatt-hour manufactured. 



Boston. 

Worces¬ 

ter. 

Lowell. 

Fall 

River. 

Malden. 

% 

Cam¬ 

bridge. 

✓ 

Lynn. 

Fuel. 

Oil and waste. 

Water. 

Wages. 

Station repairs. 

Steam repairs. 

Electrical repairs. 

Miscellaneous. 

0.462 

.008 

.024 

.192 

.015 

.042 

.056 

.023 

0.703 
.027 
.034 
.360 
.012 
.055 
.055 

0.710 

.009 

.008 

.262 

.020 

.020 

.009 

.022 

0.880 
.032 
.012 
.538 
.012 
.037 
.029 
.080 

0.635 

.017 

.032 

.342 

.035 

.072 

.014 

.033 

0.690 

.019 

.055 

.347 

.021 

.059 

.046 

0.618 

.012 

.040 

.296 

.052 

.147 

.045 

Total. 




.822 

1.246 

1.060 

1.620 

1.180 

1.237 

1.210 


















































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


97 


The equipment of each plant is-of modern type, thoroughly representative of good 
practice in the design of steam-generating stations using either reciprocating engines 
or turbines, and operating condensing. The figures presented are for the year ending 
June 30, 1908. 


Memorandum No. 2. 

Cost of Hydroelectric Power. 

[From Water Power Engineering, by Mead.] 

Table XLII.— Estimate of the cost of a hydroelectric 'plant at Niagara Falls. 1 


Items. 

24-hour power capacity. 

50,000 

horse¬ 

power 

develop¬ 

ment. 

75,000 

horse¬ 

power 

develop¬ 

ment. 

100,000 

horse¬ 

power 

develop¬ 

ment. 

Tunnel tail race. 

Headworks and canal. 

Wheel pit. 

Power house. 

Hydraulic equipment. 

Electric equipment. 

Transformer station and equipment. 

Office building and machine shop. 

Miscellaneous. 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. 

Interest, 2 years, at 4 per cent. 

Total capital cost. 

Per horsepower. 

$1,250,000 
450,000 
500,000 
300,000 
1,080,000 
760,000 
350,000 
100,000 
75,000 

.$1,250,000 
450,000 
700,000 
450,000 
1,440,000 
910,000 
525,000 
100,000 
75,000 

$1,250,000 
450,000 
700,000 
600,000 
1,980,000 
1,400,000 
700,000 
100,000 
75,000 

4,865,000 
485,000 

5,900,000 
590,000 

7,255,000 

725,000 

5,350,000 
436,560 

6,490,000 
529,584 

7,980,000 

651,168 

5,786,560 

7,019,584 

8,631,168 

114 

94 

86 



i First Report of Hydro-Electric Power Commission of the Province of Ontario, p. 15. 

Other things being comparatively equal, the cost of development varies inversely, 
although not in the same ratio, as the head. The reason of this is evident from the fact 
that while the power of a stream is directly proportional to the head, the capacity of a 
turbine increases as the three-halves power of the head. With double the head the 
power of a wheel is increased almost three times. 

For moderate changes in head, the cost of the turbines will vary in proportion to 
their size and not their capacity, so that the cost per unit of capacity will usually 
decrease considerably with the head. The cost per unit of capacity of other features 
of water-power plants will also frequently decrease as the head increases. This is 
particularly true of pondage capacity, which increases in value directly as the head 
increases, although the cost per unit of land overflowed may remain constant. The 
relative cost of high and low head developments may be illustrated by the compara¬ 
tive cost of two plants recently designed by the writer which were of approximately 
the same capacity but working under different heads. The comparison is as follows: 

Table XLIII.— Comparative cost of water-power plants. 


* 


Cost of water-power development. 

Capacity. 

Head. 

Without 

dam. 

With 

dam. 

With dam 
and 

electrical 

equipment. 

With dam, 
electrical 
equipment, 
and trans¬ 
mission 
line. 

8,000 horsepower. 

18 

63.50 

86 

115 

150 

Do. 

80 

21.00 

39 

60 

90 


H. Doc 253, 63-1 


7 


























































98 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

Table XLIV .—Estimates of the cost of developing various Comachian power from re¬ 
ports of Ontario Hydroelectric Poiver Commission. 


Location of proposed development. 


I. 

Healeys Falls, Lower Tient River 
Middle Falls, Lower Trent River. 

Rauneys Fall. 

Rapids above Glen Miller. 

Rapids above Trenton. 


II. 


Maitland River. 

Saugeen River. 

Beaver River (Eugenia Falls) 
Severn River (Big Chute) 
South River. 


III. 

St. Lawrence River, Iroquois, Ontario 
Mississippi River, High Falls, Ontario: 

(а) .-----. 

( б ) . 

Montreal River, Fountain Falls, Ontario 

IV. 

Dog Lake, Kaministiquia River. 

Cameron Rapids. 

Slate Falls. 



ural 

id. 

Avail¬ 

able 

head. 

Power 

developed, 

horse¬ 

power. 

Estimated 

capital 

cost. 

Cost per 
horse¬ 
power. 


60 

8,000 

$675,000 

$84. 38 


30 

5,200 

475,000 

91.37 


35 

6,000 

425,000 

69.67 


18 

3,200 

350,000 

109.38 


18 

3,200 

370,000 

115. 63 


i 80 

1,600 

325,000 

203.12 


40 

1,333 

250,000 

187. 53 


420 

2,267 

291,000 • 

128. 28 


2 52 

4,000 

350.000 

87. 50 


85 

750 

115,000 

153.33 


12 

1,200 

179,000 

149.16 


» 78 

2,400 

195,000 

81.25 


78 

1,100 

123,000 

181. 82 


27 

2,400 

214,000 

89.16 

347 

4 310 

13,676 

832,000 

61.00 

347 

310 

6,840 

619, 700 

91.00 

39 


16,350 

815,000 

50.00 

39 


8,250 

600,000 

73. 00 

31 

40 

3,686 

357,600 

97.00 

31 

40 

1,843 

260,000 

. 141.00 


i Third report; dam rather expensive. 3 With storage developed. 

s Head works and canal less expensive than ordinary. 4 Including 3,500 feet of headwater tunnel. 


Table XLV .—Development costs of various American water-power plants. 


Name or location of 
plant. 

Reference. 

Head, 
in feet. 

Horse¬ 
power 
capac¬ 
ity at 
turbine 
shaft. 

Cost. 

Cost per 
horse¬ 
power. 

Notes. 

1. Chicago Drainage 

Electrical World, 

28 

15,500 

$3,500,000 

$225. 80 

Note D. 

Canal, Lockport, 

1906, vol. 47, p. 398. 






in. 







2. Columbus, Ga. 

Electrical World 

40 

9,000 

450,000 

50. 00 

Notes C and E. 


and Engineer, 1904, 







vol. 43, p. 165. 






3. Catawba, S. C. 

Engineering Record, 

25 

10,000 

1,100,000 

110. 00 

Notes D and F. 


1904, vol. 50, pp. 







114, 129. 






4. Tariffville, Conn... 

American Electri- 

31 

2,300 


125. 00 

Note D. 


cian, 1900, vol. 12, 







p.107. 






5. Delta, Pa. 

Engineering News, 

42 

550 

30,000 

54.00 

Notes D and G. 


1898, vol. 39, p. 250. 






6. Lachine, Montreal. 

Electrical World. 

16 

6,600 

957, 200 

. 145.80 

Notes I) and H. 


1898, vol. 31, p. 744. 






7. Winnipeg, Mani- 

Electrical World, 

40 

25,600 

4,000,000 

156. 25 

Notes D and I. 

toba. 

1906, vol. 47, p. 







1291. 






8. Manchester. N. II.. 



30 

6,000 


66. 00 

Notes A and I. 

9. Lowell, Mass. 



13 



110. 00 

Not,os A and .T 

10. Lowell, Mass. 


The Engineer, 1902, 

18 



57. 00 

Notps A and ,T 

11. Big Cottonw o o d , 


vol. 39, p. 64. 

370 

3,000 

325,000 

108. 25 

Notes D and Iv. 

Utah. 








12. Lawrence, Mass... 




1,000 


67.50 

Notos A and T 

13. Spier Falls. N. Y.. 

Scientific American, 

90 

50,000 

2,100,000 

42. 00 

Note C. 


Sept. 12, 1903. 























































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVERS. 
Table XL VI .—Development costs of various foreign water-power plants. 


99 





Horse- 




Name or location of 
plant. 

Reference. 

Head, 
in feet. 

power 
capac¬ 
ity at 

Cost. 

Cost per 
horse- 

Notes. 



turbine 


power. 





shaft. 




Zurich, Switzerland... 

Electricity (N. Y.), 

( l > 

25,300 

$4,650,000 

$183.90 

Notes D and L. 


1899, vol. 16, p. 148. 




Rhinefelden, G e r - 

Electrician (Eon- 

10-16 

15,000 

1,225,000 

81.70 

Note C. 

many. 

don), 1897, vol. 38, 





p. 716. 






Paderno. Italv. 

The Engineer, 1902, 
vol. 39, p. 64. 

90 

13,000 


120.00 

Note B. 




Champ. France. 

Engineering Record, 

104 

6,750 

1,000,000 

148.00 

Note D. 


1905, vol. 52, p. 648. 






Department de l’lsere, 

330 

4,000 

136,000 

34.00 

Note B. 

France. 

E lectrica 1 R ev iew 




Department de Jura. 
France. 

(London), 1898, 

6.5 

300 

45,000 

150.00 

Note D. 

vol. 43, p. 475. 






Upper Savoy, France.. 

450 

11,000 

182,000 

165.50 

Notes C and M. 

Chedde, France. 


455 

10,000 


i 30.00 
\ 42.50 

Note A. 

Notes C and N. 




Chevres, Switzerland.. 


14-27 

9,600 

1,044,000 

109.00 

Note B. 

Kubel, Switzerland... 


296 

5,000 

1,074,000 

215.00 

Notes D and O. 

SchafThausen, G e r - 

Die Ausnutzung der 

( 2 ) 

2.700 

365,000 

135.00 

Notes D and P. 

many. 

Gersthofon, Germany. 

■ Wasserkrafts, p. 
198. F.Mattern. 

(*) 

6,000 

812,500 

135.00 

Note B. 

Augsburg, Gormany.. 

9,100 

1,875,000 

206.00 

Note D. 

Heimbach, Germany.. 


230-360 

16,500 

2,125,000 

130.00 

Notes D and Q. 

Lvon, France. 


33-40 

22, 750 

6.500,000 

287.50 

Notes D and R. 

Muhlhausen, G e r - 


24-30 

23,000 

3,075,000 

132.50 

Note B. 

many. 




% 



i Very low. 213.3 to 15.8: 11.5 to 14.8. 

Notes in Tables XI.V and XLVI. 

» 32.8 to 34.4. 


Note A.—'The cost of water-power development, not including dam. 

Note B.—The cost of water-power development, including dam, 

Note 0.—The cost of complete water-power development, including electric station equipment. 

Note D.—The cost of complete water-power development, including electric station equipment and 
transmission lines. 

Note E.—Mostly 12-hour horsepower distributed to adjacent mills at the generated voltage. 

Note F.—Severe climatic and river conditions during construction. 

Note G.—'Vuy favorable location; cheap timber dam; transmission line only 5 miles long. 

Note H.—Includes extra real estate investment. 

Note I.—Expensive canals in rock and very extensive concrete construction. 

Note J.—Factory installation. 

Note K.—Pelton wheels and 1,500 feet wood-stave pipe line. 

Note L.—Four interconnected plants; including also steam auxiliary. 

Note M.—Not including 5.000 horsepower necessary steam auxiliary. 

Note N.—Not including dam. 

Note O.—With 1,000 horsepower steam auxiliary. 

Note P.—Two interconnected plants. 

Note Q.—15-mile transmission line. 

Note R.—12-mile feeder canal. 


Hydroelectric Practice. 

[By Von Schon.} 

Article 27. The power equipment consists of water turbines, with governors and 
draft tubes, and of electric generators, exciters, and switchboards. When generators 
are coupled to turbine shafts and the units are of standard type, an estimate of $20 
per horsepower will generally cover its cost; when turbines have to be geared to gen¬ 
erator shafts, the cost per horsepower will be $24. 

Art. 28. The last item comprises the transmission line and equipment. As a rule, 
a wooden-pole line is recommendable, poles being 35 feet long and set 10f> feet apart. 
A single circuit will be sufficient excepting for large outputs. Such a line requires 
cross arms, pins, insulators, and three strands of bare copper wire the size, and there¬ 
fore weight, of which depends upon the amount of current to be transmitted, the 
voltage of transmission, and the drop or loss to be allowed. On lines up to 50 miles 
the loss may be economically confined to 10 per cent. 

Diagram 16 gives quantity of copper wire for transmission line, for different output 
and voltage, at 5 per cent line drop per mile, to which are to be added 50 poles, 100 
cross arms. 150 pins and insulators for single-circuit three-phase line. 





































100 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVEBS. 


Transformers to raise and lower voltage at terminals of line cost $6 per kilowatt of 
output. 

A substation lias to be provided at market end of line, which may be estimated for 
at $1 per horsepower. 

Note. —Of course, the cost of turbines will vary with the head, according to the 
rule laid down by Mead. The general rule of article 27 above will apply to a head 
of about 60 feet. (H. B. F.) 


Steam. 

[From Electric Power Transmission, by Bell.] 

DIGEST OF CHAPTER XVI. 

Dr. C. E. Emery gives the following table for 500 net horsepower of 10 hours for 
308 days in the year: 


Kind of engine. 

Coal $2 
per ton. 

Coal $3 
per ton. 

Coal $4 
per ton. 

Coal $5 
per ton. 

Simple high speed. 

$29. 81 

$36.17 

$42.54 

$48.90 

Simple low speed. 

28.46 

34.20 

39.94 

45. 67 

Simple low speed, condensing. 

22.82 

26. 77 

30.73 

34.69 

Compound condensing, low speed. 

21.97 

25.53 

29.09 

32. 65 

Triple expansion condensing, low speed. 

22.35 

25.32 

28.28 

31.25 



Bell says that, assuming a power of 1,000 brake horsepower and coal at $2 per long 
ton, and making the necessary modifications in the data as just indicated (that is, 
reducing labor cost and reducing interest to 5 per cent), the cost of the horsepower 
year on the basis of 308 days of 10 hours each per year, with first-class compound con¬ 
densing engines, falls to about $17 to $18. These figures have unquestionably been 
reached in actual practice, although rather seldom. They must, however, now and 
then be reckoned with, and can be met only by very carefully planned transmission 
from an unusually cheap water power. As a rule, even in large engine plants, the 
cost per horsepower year of 3,080 hours runs above rather than below $20. On varia¬ 
ble load the costs are likely to run 20 or 25 per cent higher. There are few cases in 
which transmission from cheap waterpower on a large scale can not beat out steam 
power even in large units. 

In units under 50 horsepower one is very unlikely to find the horsepower year, 
reckoned on the above basis of 10 hours per day, costing less than $50, even with coal 
as low as $2 per long ton. 

Dr. Emery lias worked out at considerable length the problem of the cost of steam 
power on a very large scale and with the most economical modern machinery. He 
assumed a 20,000 horsepower plant, worked 24 hours per day, on a variable load aver¬ 
aging 12,760 horsepower, 63.8 per cent of the maximum. This load factor is judi¬ 
ciously estimated and could certainly be realized in a plant of such size, employed 
in the general distribution of power. Taking coal at one mill per pound, $2.24 per 
long ton, and entering every item of expense, he found the total cost per horsepower 
per year to be $33.14. If the plant were established at the mouth of the coal mine, 
fuel should be obtained at not over one-third the above cost. This advantage would 
bring the cost per horsepower per year down to $24.89. Taking now 15,000^ kilowatt 
in dynamo capacity in large direct coupled units, say five in number, the electrical 
plant would cost, installed with all needful accessories and ready to run, $200,000. 
Taking interest, taxes, and depreciation together at 10 per cent, which is enough, 
since a 3 per cent sinking fund would amply allow for depreciation; allowing $15,000 
per year for additional labor and superintendence and $10,000 more for maintenance 
and miscellaneous expenses, brings the total annual charge for the electrical ma¬ 
chinery to $45,000. Adding this to the steam power item and reducing the whole to 
cost per kilowatt-hour, assuming 94 per cent average dynamo efficiency, the total 
cost per kilowatt-hour delivered at the station switchboard becomes 0.436 cent. 
Working, then, on an immense scale from cheap coal, it is safe to say that less than 
half a cent per kilowatt-hour will deliver the energy to the bus bars. 

The next step is the cost of delivering it to the customer. This varies so greatly, 
according to circumstances, that an average is very hard to strike. A plant such as 
we are considering will usually be installed only when the radius of distribution is 
fairly long. Taking the transmission power as 50 miles, the line and right of way. 
using 30,000 volts, may be taken as about $25 per kilowatt; the raising and reducing 






















ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 101 


transformers with substation and equipment would cost perhaps $15 per kilowatt and 
the distributing circuits, with a fair proportion of large motors, about $10 per kilowatt 
additional. The complete distributing system for 15,000 kilowatt would then cost 
about $750,000. Figuring interest and depreciation roundly at 10 per cent, the annual 
charge is $75,000. Add now $15,000 for labor in substation and distributing system, 
$10,000 for general administrative expense, and 5 per cent on the cost for maintenance 
and miscellaneous expenses, and we reach a total annual charge for distribution of 
$137,500. The average output being almost exactly 9,000 kilowatts, the cost of dis¬ 
tribution per kilowatt hour is 0.174 cent. The actual cost of generating and dis¬ 
tributing the power then becomes 0.610 cent per kilowatt-hour. This is probably 
pretty nearly a minimum for distribution of power from coal mines. 

Page 333 .—The best triple-expansion condensing engines worked under favorable 
conditions can be counted on to do a little better than 1.5 pounds of coal per indicated 
horsepower hour, occasionally even in the neighborhood of 1.25 pounds. Even with 
compound condensing engines, tests are now and then recorded, showing below 1.5 
pounds of coal per indicated horsepower-hour. 


Memorandum No. 3. 

Cost and dimensions of some storage reservoirs. 

UNITED STATES. 


Name. 

Locality. 

Character. 

P-Ath finder 

Wyoming. 

Masonry. 

Tvler . 

Texas... 

Hydraulic fill. 

Indian Rivpr 

New York. 

Masonry. 

BiiAna Vista I.ake 

California. 

Earth..*. 

T-aramift RivAr 

Wyoming. 

.do. 

ShdshrvnA 

.do. 

Masonry. 

R. nns a vaI t. 

Arizona. 

.do. 


Idaho. 

Earth. 

T.aVa Me.\fi 11‘in 

New Mexico. 

Loose rock and earth.. 

EnrAkn T.aVa 

California. 

Rock fill. 

W ind snr 

•Colorado. 

Earth. 

Bell Fourche. —... 

Rftar VaIIav 

South Dakota. 

California. 

.do. 

Masonry. 

Faneh Arie 

. .do. 

Rock fill. 

East Canyon Creek.... 

Utah. 

Loose rock, steel core.. 

nil vam apa 

California. 

Earth. 

Kti Polish 

do. 

R ock-fill crib. 

Bowman .... 

.do. 

Loose rock, timber_ 


do. 

Masonry. 


Massachusetts. 

.do. 

fil An wi 1d 

N ew York. 

Earth. 


California. 

Hydraulic fill. 

TT Am Af Va1 1 av 

. .do. 

Masonry. 


Colorado . 

Earth. 

Sodom 

N ew York. 

Masonry and earth.... 


California. 

Earth. 

T.alrA Avalon 

New Mexico. 

Rock fill and earth.... 


California. 

Rock fill. 


Colorado . 

Earth. 


_do. 

.do. 


California. 

Hydraulic fill. 

Uast.l Awood 

Colorado. 

Loose rock, masonry .. 


do. 

Earth. 


California . 

.do. 


N aw York. 

.do. 


.do. 

Masonry. 

Do 

do. 

.do. 

Tit.iens . 

.do. 

Masonry and earth.... 


New Jersey. 

Earth. 

Bound Hill 

Pennsylvania. 

Masonry and earth.... 


Colorado. 

Earth. 


Virginia . 

Concrete. 


Colorado .... 

Earth. 


A rizona. 

Masonry. 


Connecticut. 

.do. 


Arizona. 

.do. 


do. 

.do. 


Naw Jersey . 

Earth. 


A ri zon a . 

Steel. 





Capacity. 


Acre-feet. 
1,025,000 
1,770 . 
102,550 
170,000 . 
120,000 . 
456,000 
1,284,000 
186,000 
89,000 
15,170 . 
23,000 . 
207,770 
40,550 
1,350 . 
5,700 

11.500 
14,900 
20,600 
22,570 

193,300 

3,675 

1.300 

10.500 
5,650 

14,980 

15,000 

6.300 
3,500 

954 
459 
1,171 
12,300 
885 
13,270 
12,720 
180,000 
98,200 
22,000 
7,390 
4,050 
205 
1,115 
102 
480 
1,028 
338 
703 
2,150 


Maximum 
height 
of dam. 


Feet. 

215 


i Cost per 
! acre-foot, 
stored. 


?0. 48 
. 64 


47 


325 

280 

68 

52 


115 

64 


.80 

.88 

.98 

1.20 

1.46 

2.05 

2.23 

2.32 

3.26 

5.00 

5.30 


68 

40 


100 

95 


5.92 

7.00 

9.00 

10.40 

11.18 

11.72 

11.74 

12.90 

13.10 


122 

38 


70 

i55 


290 


14.29 

19.50 

24.50 
26.60 
27.94 

31.44 

31.45 
32.18 

32.50 
38.00 
38.69 
40.00 
40.12 
42.00 

42.30 
42.42 
46.15 
59.39 


71.39 


93.00 
97.78 
114.60 
145.90 
156.35 
169.50 
307.00 
416.30 



































































































































































































102 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


Cost and dimensions of some storage reservoirs —Continued. 

FOREIGN. 


Name. 


Bhatgur.... 

Ekruk. 

Perair. 

Ashti. 

Chumbrumbaukum_ 

Lake Fife. 

Betwa. 

Assoun. 

Tansa. 

Belubula. 

Lake Oredon. 

Villar. 

Beetaloo. 

Liez. 

Patas. 

Vyrnwy. 

Wassy. 

Temey. 

Gilleppe. 

Remscheid. 

Cbartrain. 

Talla Reservoir dam... 

Ban. 

Moucbe. 

Burraga. 

Cousin. 

San River. 

Pas du Riot. 

Furens. 

Burrater. 

Laucbensee. 


Locality. 

Character. 

Capacity. 

Maximum 
height 
of dam. 

Cost per 
acre-foot, 
stored. 



Acre-feet. 

Feet. 


India . 

Masonrv. 

126,500 

127 

$3.20 

do . 

Earth. 

76,100 

72 

4.00 

.do. 

Masonry. 

157,000 

155 

4.65 

do . 

Earth. 

32,600 

58 

4.80 

do . 

do. 

63,780 


4.89 

do 

Masonry. 

75,500 


8.34 

do. 

.do. 

54,300 

61.5 

9.10 

F, p vn t 

do. 

863,000 


13.80 

^ bJ t r . . 

India, 

do . 

52,670 


18.76 

A ii.Qt.rA.li a. 

Brick and concrete.... 

2 ,000 


22.50 

France 

Earth . 

5, 894 


24.00 

Spain 

Masonry. 

15^ 500 

170 

25.20 

Australia . 

.do. 

18,400 

110 

31.84 

France 

Earth . 

13,051 


46.00 

Tnrlia . 

. . do. 

'325 


49.00 

W alas 

Masonry. 

44,690 


74.71 

France 

Earth . 

1,740 


80.00 

do 

Masonry. 

2 ,433 


84.00 

Balgium . 

. do. 

9' 730 


89.83 

Garmanv . 

. .do. 

811 


112.45 

France 

do. 

3,647 


115.10 

F.dinbnrvh 

Earth. 

10,280 


118.66 

France 

Masonrv . 

1,499 


127. 00 

. .do. 

.do. 

l\ Oil 


143.00 

Australia . 

.do. 

310 


150. 00 

Franc©. 

.do. 

1,297 


190. 00 

Smith Africa 

Concrete. 

660 


212.10 

France. 

Masonrv. 

1,054 


243.00 

do 

do. 

1.297 


245.00 

England 

Masonry and earth.... 

2. 410 


250. 00 

Germany . 

Masonry. 

624 


390. 00 







Note. —Above taken from Irrigation Engineering, by Wilson; and Reservoirs lor Irrigation, Water 
Power, and Domestic Water Supply, by Schuyler. 


SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON LOCAL COOPERATION. 

War Department, 

United States Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala., July 13, 1912. 

Sir: 1. * * * I have the honor to submit herewith the supple¬ 

mental report ordered on the subject of local cooperation in the 
improvement of Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers. 

2. On April 20, 1912, a circular letter, copy inclosed, was sent to all 
parties known or supposed to be interested. This circular letter, 
which invited those interested to present any propositions they might 
desire, also gave notice of a meeting to be held at this office on May 
20, 1912, for a con plete discussion of the matter. This meeting was 
further given prominence as a news item by the local press. 

3. But two people appeared for a short time at this office on the day 
appointed—Mr. W. P. Lay, of Gadsden, Ala., who submitted a letter, 
and Mr. R. H. Elliott, who stated that he represented certain interests 
in Birmingham, Ala., controlling the land on one side at one of the 
proposed dam sites (No. 7), and promised to submit later a letter, 
which, however, he failed to do. These gentlemen were fully in¬ 
formed as to the object of the meeting, but there was no discussion. 
In addition, a letter was received from Mr. James Mitchell, who did 








































































































































ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA KIVERS. 103 


not appear personally. Mr. Lay and Mr. Mitchell both represent the 
interests of the Alabama Interstate Power Co. The original letters 
of Mr. Lay and Mr. Mitchell, together with a copy of each, are for¬ 
warded herewith. 

4. As will be seen from these letters, no plan of local cooperation 
was submitted. 

5. While the Alabama Interstate Power Co., a company backed by 
large amounts of English and Canadian capital, is not yet ready to 
propose any plan of cooperation, it is, nevertheless, gradually acquir¬ 
ing all available sites on the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers and is mak¬ 
ing careful surveys of both rivers. I was informed a few days ago that 
this company now controls every dam site on the Tallapoosa River 
and every one, excepting one side of No. 7, on the Coosa River. It is 
understood that the plans of this company are to develop water power 
on the Coosa River first, beginning with No. 12, and thereafter to 
develop water power on the Tallapoosa. 

6. Whether or not it is advisable as a question of public policy for 
the Government to permit one company to acquire a monopoly of all 
the valuable water power on the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers is 
apparently a question for higher authority. 

7. The ultimate development of these streams along the lines of 
Capt. Ferguson’s recommendations, as set forth in his report to the 
Chief of Engineers, dated June 10, 1910, appears worthy of being 
undertaken by the General Government. If this be done, however, 
it should not be postponed, as the value of land and costs of labor and 
material in the South are advancing steadily; and for every year this 
improvement, if undertaken, is delayed an increase in the estimated 
cost of the project must be expected. 

8. It is recommended that in case this improvement be undertaken 
the Government expenditure be not that recommended by Capt. Fer¬ 
guson, namely: 


For navigation only. $6, 990, 000 

For navigation share of 6 high dams on Coosa. 4, 013, 000 

For Etowah Reservoir. 4, 000, 000 


15, 003. 000 

But that the United States provide not merely for navigation, but if 

E ermissible under the law build the substructures of the power 
ouses in the six high dams, at an estimated total cost of $16,743,000. 
This amount is the sum of the estimated cost for navigation only, and 
of the cost common to navigation and power, as given in Columns I 
and II, Table E, of Capt. Ferguson’s report. The United States 
could then rent or lease to the highest bidder or bidders the power at 
each high dam, the successful bidder to install the power-house 
superstructure and electrical equipment. By an additional expendi¬ 
ture of less than 12 per cent of Capt. Ferguson’s estimate, the United 
States would not only make a more profitable investment, but would 
retain a better control of the situation. 

Very respectfully, G. D. Fitch, 

Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers. 

The Chief of Engineers, United States Army 
(Through the Division Engineer). 






104 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEES. 


[First indorsement.! 

Office of Division Engineer, Gulf Division, 

New Orleans, La., July 29, 1912. 

1. Respectfully forwarded to the Chief of Engineers. 

2. The recommendations on Capt. Ferguson’s report were based on 
the supposition that parties interested in developing power would be 
ready at any time to properly cooperate with the United States. 
This has proved fallacious. Col. Fitch’s recommendation is regarded 
as good were it practicable under the law as it now stands, but this 
is doubtful. Owing to the delays which the United States will 
experience in this and other works of similar character, it is regarded 
as advisable, in cases where electric power may be developed in con¬ 
junction with navigation improvements, the United States be author¬ 
ized to construct the works in such manner as to provide for develop¬ 
ment of hydroelectric power at the site, together with such incidental 
works for power installation as should be built at the time to avoid 
any later changes in the structures; and that the Secretary of War 
be authorized to lease power to companies or corporations upon such 
terms as may be considered equitable after due consideration of the 
original cost of construction, expense of maintenance, and a reason¬ 
able per cent upon the outlay. This would permit the United States 
to proceed at once with any desired construction without having to 
wait for an agreement of cooperation with other parties. 

In most cases the companies desiring to cooperate will be found 
either lacking the requisite capital or existing only for promotion 
purposes, in either case the United States being subjected to delay 
and embarrassment in prosecution of the work. 

3. The delay in forwarding this report was due to an attempt to 
ascertain more definite information concerning the character and 
purposes of the Alabama Interstate Power Co., but nothing definite 
has been learned. 

Lansing H. Beach, 

Lieut. Colonel, Corps of Engineers, 

Division Engineer. 


Letter of Atlantic and Gulf Portland Cement Co. 

Atlantic and Gulf Portland Cement Co., 

Ragland , Ala., July 1, 1911. 

^ Gentlemen: As there seems to be some doubt as to the advisability of the United 
States investing the money necessary to make navigable the Coosa River between 
Greensport and Wetumpka, we wish to call your attention to some of the salient 
features of this very necessary improvement. 

The removal of the obstructions between Greensport and Wetumpka would permit 
steamers from Mobile to ascend regularly via the Mobile, Alabama, and Coosa Rivers 
to Rome, Ga., a distance of 734 miles; while the Oostanaula and its tributary, the 
Coosawattee, would afford them still further navigation for a distance of 100 miles 
above Rome, thus placing an immense area in Alabama and Georgia in immediate 
communication with the Gulf of Mexico and opening up water communication with 
the extensive coal fields and iron beds and agricultural regions of the Coosa Valley. 

The river is an exceptionally favorable one for improvement, since its mean depth 
is greater in comparison with its average width than most of the western rivers, and its 
banks and channels are generally well-defined and permanent. Sand and travel bars 
are seldom found and, when found, are easily removed. From Greensport to We¬ 
tumpka the river is broken up into pools and eddies of navigable water, separated bv 
reefs, shoals, and rapids, sometimes of very great extent, absolutely impassable at low 
water and dangerous in the best stages by reason of the crookedness of the channel 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 105 


ways and the ragged rocks to be found everywhere along their borders and in mid¬ 
stream, reaching to the surface even when the water is 40 or 50 feet deep. The navi¬ 
gable water found between Greensport and Wetumpka is broken up into stretches, 
varying in length from 600 yards to 6 miles, and varying in depth from 6 to 60 feet. 
The intervening shoals vary from single reefs a few yards long in the direction of the 
current, and extending from bank to bank, to long series of shoals from a thousand 
yards to 12 miles in length. These obstructions consist almost entirely of rock, very 
little gravel being found. The average width of the river between Greonsnort and 
Wetumpka is from 800 to 1,000 feet. 

The country that would be materially and beneficially affected by the proper 
opening of this great river line by the removal of the above obstructions between the 
two points, being a distance of only 137 miles out of 815 and upward now navigable, 
is that portion of northwest Georgia lying between the Lookout Mountain on the 
northwest and the line of mountains embracing the gold belt on the southeast trav¬ 
ersed by the valleys of the Chattooga . Conasauga, Coosawattee, Oostanaula, and Etowah 
Rivers and Big Cedar Creek, and their tributaries, all whose waters help to form the 
Coosa, embracing a population of over 350.000 and an area of at least 6,000 square 
miles, or 3,840,000 acres of land, which for its productiveness of soil and mineral re¬ 
sources is unsurpassed by any other region of the same extent in the United Sta tes, 
producing cotton of the finest grade for uplands, as well as cereals, tobacco, and all 
kinds of fruits. For the production of the latter, the hills and mountains seem pecu¬ 
liarly adapted. This region is also rich in coal, iron, manganese, barytes, and other 
minerals. That portion of northeast Alabama that would be greatly benefited by 
the improvement of the Coosa River is bounded by Raccoon Mountain on the north¬ 
west and the range of hills or low mountains running parallel with and distant from 
the line of river about 35 miles on the southeast; having a general direction from the 
northeast to the southwest and in Alabama containing a population of over 300.000 
upon an area of about 7,000 square miles or 4,480,000 acres of land, not taking into 
this account any portion of the country on either side of the line traversed by the 
lower half or nearly 400 miles of the river. This section of Alabama is in ri< hness of 
soil and mineral wealth equal to that of northwest Georgia, partaking much of the 
same nature besides having extensive and inexhaustible fields of bituminous coal 
from 2 to 10 feet thick of the very finest quality and suitable for all manufacturing 
purposes. The coal fields traverse the whole area of Alabama above described and 
are immediately by the side of the extensive beds of iron ore of several varieties and 
finest quality which traverse the same area of country with the coal fields. Sand¬ 
stone. limestone, fire clay, and other minerals abound in quantities sufficient to supply 
all future ages. 

The annual saving to the people along the line of river in having cheap transporta¬ 
tion for their surplus products would naturally enhance the wealth and prosperity of 
the country at large. For want of this great thoroughfare millions of dollars worth of 
the best long-leaf pine, a great variety of oak, ash, walnut, cedar, cypress, and poplar, 
which could be turned into the best lumber, are now reduced to ashes or rot upon 
the ground. Of the lands along the line of this river, the greatest majority are of sur¬ 
passing fertility and could be developed into the most productive agricultural sec¬ 
tions in the country. 

By developing the water power, to which this river is especially adapted, manu¬ 
facturing interests would spring up all along the line. The tendency is now, as ever, 
to manufacture an article so near as possible to the source of its raw material. Ala¬ 
bama is destined to become the foremost iron and steel manufacturing State in the 
Union. At present there are inexhaustible beds of iron ore along the banks of the 
river which but await the means to develop them. As the center of the steel indus¬ 
try moves from Pittsburgh to Birmingham, which it surely will do, the mills of that 
great district will call for more and more raw material. With the iron beds and de¬ 
posits of high-grade limestone laying side by side with coal fields of highest quality, 
this region with cheap water transportation will supply this raw material for years to 
come. 

To call your attention to the fact that not only now is there a pressing need for a 
waterway through this rich and growing country, but that as early as 1870. at a time 
when this country lay crushed and benumbed as a result of the devastation of the 
recent war. those who were clear sighted enough to see the needs of the people and 
the great advantages to be gained by water transportation argued strongly in its favor 
and advocated for the immediate completion of the opening of the Coosa throughout 
its entire course. 

The chief engineer of the Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad, in his report of 1870, 
incorporated in the report of the United States Chief of Engineers for 1872, treating of 
the improvement of the Coosa River, says: 


106 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEES. 


“The wonder is that this work has not been accomplished a long time ago. Indeed, 
what channel of transportation is better calculated to spread all around industry, 
prosperity, and wealth? Capital and cheap transportation are wanted to make this 
section of the country an immense workshop capable of giving employment to thou¬ 
sands of mechanics and workmen and turning out every year millions of dollars worth 
of products of all descriptions. On the immediate banks of the river are found heavy 
and inexhaustible beds of iron ore and all the material necessary for its manufacture— 
coal, limestone, fire clay, and fireproof stone—in the greatest abundance. Judging 
from the experience of every country under similar circumstances, what an immense 
economical revolution this new channel of communication (with through transpor¬ 
tation once opened) must produce in the country at large and particularly in the 
States of Georgia and Alabama and those immediately contiguous thereto. The 
climate of the Coosa Valley is salubrious, mild, and temperate; its winters are of short 
duration; its soil rich and productive; besides the staples, everything in abundance 
which is necessary to make living cheap for workman, laborer, and mechanic. This 
great valley is intersected by a large number of streams which never freeze, and on 
them are a multitude of sites for mills and factories with inexhaustible water power, 
and are destined one day to be the customers and feeders of this great channel. It is 
almost impossible to estimate the value of these lands, which will be the natural and 
immediate result of opening the river to navigation. It is fair to suppose, however, 
that the increase will be many times greater than the amount necessary to pay for all 
of the required improvements.” 

How much more pressing are the present needs can well be conjectured. 

The South is the land of opportunity; the Promised Land of the young men of this 
generation as was the West to our fathers. The railroads recognize this fact, as they 
are spending thousands of dollars in exploitation* of this virgin country. The days of 
the great plantations are passing; the land is being divided into manageable portions 
and the man of small capital but indomitable energy has arrived and has attracted 
the eyes of the world to the results which he has accomplished. Can the Government 
refuse to help him in his struggle and give him an outlet for the fruits of his labor? 

Yours, respectfully, 

Clarence N. Wiley, Chief Chemist. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. 


Letter of Hon. Geo. W. Taylor. 

Washington, D. C., October SO, 1911. 

Gentlemen: In my impromptu remarks on the Coosa River project the other day 
I overlooked some points which may prove of interest. 

River and harbor improvement is practically a fixed policy of the Government, 
though not fully recognized as belonging to the annual budget. The sooner this is 
done the better for wise administration. 

Under this policy, especially when annual appropriations are assured, the best river 
systems should be the first to be cared for and taken up. The Coosa, and its tributa¬ 
ries and connecting rivers with the Gulf, is easily one of the five chief river systems in 
the United States. The importance has been recognized since 1826 by governmental 
aid. It is already on the docket of approved projects. 

That water navigation is a good business might be assumed. It is demonstrated to 
be the business judgment of all progressive nations, and is being pushed and soon will 
be rushed in the United States. The opinion of England is fully expressed in the 
buildingf?) of the Manchester Canal, 35 miles long, at a cost of $75,000,000, or over 
$2,000,000 per mile. The canalization of Holland and Germany scarcely need 
citation. 

The States in 1812 attempted river improvement and fell down. The Ste Sault 
Canal is a notable instance. It bankrupted Michigan, that splendid State, with the 
then enormous cost of $5,000,000—a bagatelle now. Michigan threw it off and the 
United States took up the burden and finished it. The cost was great, but who doubts 
it was worth all it cost and is worth all that is still contemplated. 

A canal is now proposed from New York to Philadelphia by the Raritan River, 
abandoning the old canal, at a proposed cost of $50,000,000, and this is only the initial 
cost of about 100 miles. The proposition includes going out to the ocean via the 
Chesapeake Bay, the cost of 15 miles, the last cut to the Chesapeake, being $15,000,000, 
as estimated, or $1,000,000 per mile. 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 107 


The Coosa from Rome to Mobile gives over 800 miles of navigation. The valley 
and its value has been estimated by the railroad interests as worth two intersecting 
railroad lines, and others are projected. Suppose a railroad could be built from Rome 
down the center of the valley for $15,000,000, how long do you think private capital 
world hesitate to make the investment? 

The heavy freight of the Coosa Valley is demonstrated by the carefully weighed 
report of Mr. W. P. Lay to be worth now such an investment. Eight hundred miles 
of canal is worth more for heavy freight seeking outlet to foreign ports than two double* 
track railroads. Else why does New York put $101,000,000 in a canal? 

The canalization of the Coosa at $15,000,000 means a cost of $18,750 per mile, the 
cheapest 800 miles of transportation within my range of information. This seems to 
settle effectually the question of cost and worth. 

The Alabama River must be deepened to 6 feet. It can only be done by locks, 
unless the upper liver is thoroughly improved and storage reservoirs are provided. 
The cost of locking fromWetumpka to Mobile can scarcely be less than $2,000,000. 
Any plan of improvement which eliminates locking over this section of the Coosa 
system is entitled to be credited with this $2,000,000. In other words, in considering 
storage reservoirs the locking of the Alabama River should also be estimated, or, rather, 
the elimination of locks thereon should be a part of the cost of storage reservoirs. 

Storage and its possibilities have been discussed long enough. It is time to make 
an experiment. It seems that nature has fixed the best place for this experiment in 
the headwaters of the Georgia tributaries to the Coosa, by furnishing the tremendous 
precipitation of 70 inches of rainfall, together with an abundant and sufficient water¬ 
shed, and extensive natural storage reservoirs requiring the least artificial assistance 
to restrain and hold water for use for navigation and power. The cost of storage, 
estimated at $4,000,000, makes this 800-mile canal (for navigation alone) cost less 
than $20,000 per mile. 

As suggested in my remarks, the question of storage reservoirs is up to the Army 
engineer. 

The Ohio River improvement will soon call for $25,000,000 for storage reservoirs, 
and scarcely 50 miles additional navigation. What better proposition for trying the 
value of storage reservoirs can be found in the United States than the Coosa River 
system? If floods can be minimized the vast acreage of land in the basin subject to 
overflow which will be preserved will alone justify the expenditure of $4,000,000. 

The water power, estimated at 300,000 horsepower, more or less, would alone justify 
the cost of the storage reservoirs at $4,000,000. This water power can be used by the 
Government if it chooses, or rented. A fair rental value after 10 years would be not 
less than $3 per horsepower, to be increased at periods of 10 years, as conditions permit. 
This would mean an annual income of $900,000 in round numbers, and at this rate the 
Government would be fully reimbursed in less than 16 years for the present outlay 
of $15,000,000, and forever thereafter would receive a steady income of $1,000,000 per 
year as the minimum. In 50 years the investment would have returned its full cost 
and put into the Treasury of the United States every dollar that has ever been 
expended in river and harbor improvements in Alabama from 1826 to the present day. 

Such a proposition shoidd be put on its feet at once and provision made to complete 
it in 10 years or less. Congress has long since given its endorsement to the improve¬ 
ment of the Coosa River system. It now only remains for the engineer department 
to work out the best plan, having in view not the present situation hut the completion 
of this great work to its fullest potential force as a factor in transportation, to meet the 
growing demands of commerce in the Gulf of Mexico. The waste of power in the 
Coosa valley has gone on too long already. The immense natural resources of the 
Coosa valley have been lying undeveloped as long as the real good of the couni ry can 
afford. 

The iron, coal, bauxite, marble, agricultural products, and other values only need 
cheap transportation to the sea to enter into their proper place in furnishing wealth to 
the Nation. 

If it paid and still pays Manchester to spend $2,000,000 per mile for transportation 
(navigation) to the sea, with her limited contributing territory, how can it be said 
that it will not pay the United States to expend $20,000 per mile for 800 miles of trans¬ 
portation (navigation), not to mention flood contract and reclamation of lands and 
potential energies of 300,000 horsepower in a region blessed with a prodigality of 
natural resources and alive with active American citizens seeking to develop them. 
Capital only awaits the verdict of the Army engineer. 

Respectfully, Geo. W. Taylor, 

M. C., Alabama, 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. 


108 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 

Letter of Lieut. Col. G. D. Fitch, Corps of Engineers. 

War Department, 

United States Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala., April 20, 1912. 

Sir: Referring to the improvement of the Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, as 
Contemplated in a report of a survey made under this office and submitted to the 
department, I have the honor to state that action upon this report is being withheld, 
it being understood that certain water-power interests have stated that they have not 
had full opportunity of presenting their views on the subject of cooperation in the 
matter of the improvement of these streams. 

I am instructed by the department to investigate further the subject of local coopera¬ 
tion in the improvement of the rivers named and to afford those interested in this 
matter full opportunity to be heard and present any propositions that they may desire 
on the subject. Pursuant to these instructions, I beg to state that I will be pleased to 
meet the representatives of any interests which may be concerned at this office on 
May 20, 1912, for a complete discussion of the matter of cooperation by private parties. 
It is requested that those interested present at this meeting any statements, data, 
propositions, etc., they may desire to submit, as far as possible in writing. 

In order to afford the greatest possible facilities to those who will visit this place, it 
may be stated that the entire day will be given to the discussion of this question. In 
other words, those arriving at any hour up to 5 o’clock will be heard at any time during 
the day most convenient to them. 

I would appreciate an acknowledgment of this letter, together with a statement as 
to whether you will or will not visit this office on May 20. I would also appreciate your 
placing this matter before any other interested parties who may not be known to this 
Office and who have not received a similar letter to this. 

Very respectfully, G. D. Fitch. 

Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers. 

Mr. W. P. Lay, Gadsden. Ala. 

Mr. James Mitchell, Roomd06, Bell Building, Montgomery, Ala. 

Mr. R. A. Mitchell, Gadsden, Ala. 

Mr. W. T. Brown, Ragland, Ala. 

The Business Men’s League, Montgomery, Ala. 


Letter of Mr. W. P. Lay. 

Montgomery, Ala., May 20, 1912. 

Dear Sir: After many years of efforts we have only very recently succeeded in 
interesting capital in the proposed cooperative plan for the development of both navi¬ 
gation and power on the Coosa River. The people whom we have succeeded in getting 
interested in this work are the Alabama Interstate Power Company. 

I regret to say, however, that these people have not as yet had time to make a study 
of the situation sufficient to enable them to make any definite proposition, and they 
are also in the dark as to the recommendations of Maj. Ferguson, in his report, there¬ 
fore, I respectfully request that these people be given 60 days further time for a study 
and investigation of this most commendable undertaking. 

I also beg to request that owing to the importance of the great questions involved, 
that these people be allowed to take the matter up with the board of review, in 
Washington, direct, to the end that they may work together in outlining and agreeing 
on some plan of cooperation that may be mutually satisfactory to all interests. 

I would respectfully ask, if it meets your views, that this request be submitted with 
Vour report, and that the Alabama Interstate Power Co. be given an opportunity to go 
before the board of review in Washington on this subject at some time within 60 days 
that might suit the board of review. 

Hoping this may have your kind consideration, and thanking you for the oppor¬ 
tunity of being heard on the subject, I am, 

Yours, very truly, W. P. Lay, 

Chairman Coosa River Improvement Association. 

Lieut. Col. G. D. Fitch, 

Corps of Engineers. 



ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 109 


Letter of Alabama Interstate Power Co. 

Alabama Interstate Power Co., 

Montgomery, Ala., May 20, 1912. 

Sir: Under date of April 20, you addressed a communication to the writer stating 
that- you had been instructed by the department to investigate further the subject of 
local cooperation in the improvement of Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, and 
to afford those interested in this matter full opportunity to meet you and present any 
proposition that they might desire on the subject. 

Pursuant to these instructions, you stated that you would be pleased to meet repre* 
sentatives of any interests which may be concerned, at your office in Montgomery on 
May 20, 1912, for a complete discussion of the matter of cooperation by private parties, 

The Alabama Power Co., represented by the writer, has secured water rights, reser¬ 
voir lands and sites for the development of water power upon the Coosa and Talla¬ 
poosa Rivers, with the intention of eventually developing power and distributing it 
electrically from both these streams. It has not yet been determined definitely upon 
which stream or at what point upon either the initial development will be made. 

The physical data at the command of the company is as yet wholly inadequate to a, 
determination of the technical questions involved. The purchase of land in the pro* 
posed reservoir sites, the changing of alignment of highways and railroads and similar 
matters are under negotiation. 

Bearing upon any possible cooperation between the Government and this company 
in the erection and use of works incident to the development of power is the important 
question of the extent to which the company’s developments will benefit the public 
in the improvement of navigation and water supply. As to this we are wholly in the 
dark. 

We understand that the War Department has made extensive surveys, collated and 
systematized information and made a report with recommendations covering not only 
the questions of storage on the Etowah, Tallapoosa, and Coosa Rivers, but the effect 
upon navigation of thus regulating the stream flow. This information is not public. 
It is impracticable within reasonable limits of time for private interests to secure this 
information independently of the Government, and even if thus secured, it could not 
in the nature of things be accepted by the Government as the basis of Government 
cooperation. 

We therefore regretfully reach the conclusion that at this time we are wholly unable, 
in the absence of knowing definitely what we ourselves propose to do on the one hand, 
and what can be accomplished for the benefit of the public on the other, to offer any 
suggestions as to a plan of cooperation between the Government and this company, 

Generally speaking, the preliminary studies made by our engineers indicate that 
the construction of a high dam at Cherokee Bluffs on the Tallapoosa River will enable 
the flow of this river to be so regulated as to deliver to the Alabama River during 
periods of low water a sufficient volume of water to so increase its depth as to afford 
practicable year-round navigation upon that stream. 

In this connection we have to present to you most earnestly the desirability, in the 
interests of all concerned, of there being made public the entire report of Capt. H. B. 
Ferguson of 1909 and 1910 on the Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, together 
with his recommendations, and all data, plans, drawings, maps, and estimates iq 
connection therewith. 

With the Government’s reports before us, and definite studies of the power require® 
ments completed, we should have a basis for presenting to the Government a definite 
and concise plan for our contributing to navigation and water supply in the hope 
that the Government will cooperate with the Alabama Interstate Power Co. in a just 
and equitable manner. 

The spirit of this letter is to set forth our desire to reach a common basis for the 
intelligent analysis and discussion of this subject. 

Respectfully, James Mitchell, 

Lieut. Col. G. D. Fitch, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Letter of Alabama Power Co. 

Alabama Power Co. 
Birmingham, Ala., January 3, 1913, 

Sir: Please again refer to your letter to this company dated November 22, 1912 4 
and our answer of December 2. 

In undertaking to make a definite reply to your communication with reference to 
a plan of local cooperation between the Government and this company for the joint 



110 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA EIVEKS. 


improvement of navigation and development of power on the Coosa River we must 
ask you to refer to this company’s answer of May 20 to the invitation from Lieut. 
Col. Fitch of April 20, inviting us to a conference to discuss local cooperation in the 
improvement of the river named. 

In the course of our letter to Lieut. Col. Fitch of May 20 you will find the following: 
“It has not yet been determined definitely upon which stream or at what point upon 
either the initial development will be made.” 

Subsequent to our letter of May 20 to Lieut. Col. Fitch, litigation ensued between 
this company and the Tallassee Falls Mfg. Co. et al., and other matters of a local nature 
developed on account of which it was impracticable to proceed with original plans 
to construct a power dam at Cherokee Bluffs on the Tallapoosa River, and as that 
litigation promised to be lengthy, and still does, we were forced to make the initial 
development at Lock 12 on the Coosa River, where the Alabama Power Co. was granted 
a permit in a bill passed by Congress on March 4, 1907, to erect a dam. 

In order that you may fully appreciate the serious difficulties with which we have 
been confronted in carrying forward the originally planned constructive purposes, 
we beg to advise you that the Alabama Interstate Power Co. entered into a contract 
with the American Cyanamid Co. to supply that company with power from the pro¬ 
posed Cherokee Bluffs development. When such development was necessarily de¬ 
terred, and as the primary power developable at Lock 12 on the Coosa River would 
not be sufficient to fulfill the contract with the American Cyanamid Co., and at the 
same time supply the necessary power for public distribution which this company 
had undertaken to deliver, and in order to carry out the contract with the American 
Cyanamid Co., Senate bill No. 7343 was introduced in the Senate on July 20,1912, by 
Senator Bankhead, and this bill was finally passed by Congress, on August 22, 1912. 

To our great disappointment, the President, on August 24, 1912, vetoed the bill 
passed by Congress, thus making it practically impossible to fulfill the contract with 
the American Cyanamid Co.; in fact, the President’s veto so seriously changed and 
discouraged our original program as to inflict a serious hardship upon us, and has 
caused us to suffer great, and perhaps irreparable, loss. 

In tne formation, organization, and financing of our enterprise it was represented 
to the English financiers, who provided the necessary funds, that the general dam 
laws as passed by Congress in 1906 and amended in 1910 were the laws that fixed the 
policy of the United States as governing joint navigation-power projects in the navigable 
streams of Alabama, which might invite private enterprise and investment, and that 
Under these laws permits from the Federal Government could be promptly secured 
for the construction of dams in the Coosa River at those points where this company is 
the riparian owner. 

As a reassurance to the stockholders, it was represented that the attitude and policy 
of the Federal Government as to the application of these laws was clearly set out in 
Circular No. 14, issued from the War Department by Gen. Mackenzie, then Chief of 
Engineers, on April 4, 1905, and attention was especially directed to the strong indorse¬ 
ment of the Hon. William H. Taft, then Secretary of War, who said, in part, on January 
17, 1905, in his transmittal of Circular No. 14: “The report seems to me to be very 
comprehensive, accurate, and instructive.” 

This company, relying upon and believing in the good faith of the Government, 
projected its water-power development plan for carrying out its purpose to cooperate 
with the Federal Government in the improvement of the Coosa River. The Presi¬ 
dent’s veto of Senate bill No. 7343 has therefore destroyed and made impossible 
the constructive plans of this company. 

Therefore, while this company has every willingness and sincerely desires to respond 
to your invitation to meet with you and 'discuss plans of cooperation in the improve¬ 
ment of the Coosa River, we believe that it will be clear to you after reading this letter 
and the printed documents herewith inclosed to you for your review that no plan 
of cooperation can be adopted under which this company can proceed with the con¬ 
struction of power dams in the Coosa River that may be approved by your department, 
since the Federal Government itself has refused, by the President’s veto of Senate 
bill No. 7343, to permit this company to construct these dams, thus making any plans 
of cooperation at present impossible. 

With your department, it is the sincere purpose of this company to cooperate in 
every possible way to carry forward these joint developments, and we shall be very glad 
indeed to send a representative to discuss this important subject with you upon'any 
date that may be agreed upon as mutually convenient, and it will be an infinite relief 
from the difficulties and discouragements that now confront us, and from which we are 
suffering great loss, if perhaps you may fortunately suggest a plan of cooperation that 
may be, with the consent of the Federal Government, constructively carried out. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. Ill 


We shall appreciate any suggestions you may make, and in such event will very 
promptly arrange to have a representative meet you on any date and at any place that 
you may find it convenient to name. 

Very respectfully, W. W. Freeman, 

Vice President and General Manager. 

Maj. Earl I. Brown, 

Corps of Engineers. 


Letter of Maj. Earl I. Brown, Corps of Engineers. 

War Department, 

United States Engineer Office, 

Montgomery , Ala., January 9, 19Id. 

From: Maj. Earl I. Brown, Corps of Engineers. 

To: The Chief of Engineers, United States Army. 

Subject: Local cooperation, Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers. 

1. Referring to first indorsement and to letter from my predecessor, dated July 
12, 1912, on the subject of cooperation by local interests on the proposed improvement 
of Etowah, Coosa, and Tallapoosa Rivers, I am transmitting herewith, at the request 
of the Alabama Power Co., a letter received from them recently setting forth the diffi¬ 
culties which have hitherto prevented them from formulating and presenting a defi¬ 
nite plan of cooperation. 

2. I have been assured by representatives of the company that they are very anx¬ 
ious to expedite this matter, but are unable to do so until they have more definite 
information as to what will be the policy of the Federal Government in regard to 
charges on power developed. 

3. Although this company is amply able financially to carry out any plan of coopera¬ 
tion that may be agreed upon, the adoption of a policy as announced by the President 
in his veto message upon bill S. 7343, Sixty-second Congress, second session, will 
probably decide them not to undertake such cooperation. 

Earl I. Brown. 


Memorial and Statement of Facts of Mr. W. P. Lay et al. 

Gentlemen: A notice was issued by G. D. Fitch, lieutenant colonel of engineers, 
in charge of the district embracing the Coosa-Alabama River, that your honorable 
board was unable to concur in the recommendation of Capt. H. B. Ferguson, former 
district officer, for the improvement of said river, for the reason that you did not be¬ 
lieve that the probable benefits to general commerce and navigation likely to result 
from the improvement would be sufficient to justify the expenditure recommended 
in said report. 

On receipt of this notice a meeting was called at Montgomery, Ala., to consider 
said notice, and the undersigned were appointed a committee to appear before your 
honorable body and present such facts as we hope may convince you that the proba¬ 
ble benefits to commerce and navigation will justify the expenditure recommended 
in said report. In conformity with the purpose of our appointment we respectfully 
submit the following memorial and statement of facts: 

The Coosa-Alabama River, in Georgia and Alabama, from the standpoint of water 
discharge, is the third largest stream in the South, and penetrates a region the com¬ 
bined richness of which in agriculture, manufactures, minerals, and other natural 
resources, in such close proximity to each other, so near the seaboard, is without a 
parallel in the world. 

We beg to represent further that the products of this region are such that they are 
not only well suited but especially attractive for exporting, and while these products 
are now being exported to a limited extent, a much greater proportion, as we shall 
hereafter undertake to show you, are awaiting this trade. 

We beg to represent to your honorable body still further that the Coosa-Alabama 
River is a great natural highway, both ends of which have been in successful naviga¬ 
tion for almost a century, and tiiat there would be about 800 miles of through naviga¬ 
tion to the Gulf over this splendid stream were it not for a series of rapids about midway 
its length which cuts navigation in twain. Then further, penetrating as it does the 
great natural store of riches above mentioned, the effects of through navigation would 
be not only to develop a large local and intermediate traffic, but to give to these 
products a direct route of water transportation to the sea for export . 

In view of the inevitable impetus that will be given the export trade from the 
southern coast by the opening of the Panama Canal, this fact becomes very significant. 




ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


m 


We must therefore insist that the improvement of no other river now being considered 
by the Federal Government is more urgently needed or promises greater results than 
that of the Coosa-Alabama River in Georgia and Alabama. 

COOSA-ALABAMA RIVER. 

The Coosa-Alabama River has a drainage area of about 10,000 square miles, and 
from the standpoint of water discharge is the third largest stream in the South, being 
exceeded only by the Mississippi and the Tennessee, and its course to tidewater is 
direct and short. It rises in the Appalachian range of mountains, where, with the 
exception of one or two small areas in the States of Oregon and Washington, the precipi¬ 
tation of rain is the largest in the entire United States, with good seasonable distribu¬ 
tion and in which the topography is favorable for conserving or impounding the flood 
waters. It flows thence in a southwesterly direction along the folds of the disappearing 
Appalachian Range, on the high plateau of the Piedmont belt, through a region next in 
importance as to quantity of rainfall and perhaps unequaled for its numerous large, 
perpetual, gushing springs and small streams that contribute to its mighty force and 
volume, until about midway its length it passes off of the high plateau above men¬ 
tioned over a series of great rapids, just east of Birmingham, between Gadsden and 
Montgomery, Ala., into the coastal plain, through which it continues to wend its way 
on to the Gulf of Mexico at Mobile, Ala. 

The great number of large, perpetual, gushing, limestone springs found in the upper 
Coosa-Alabama Valley is a geological sequence from the fact that, as the Appalachian 
Range of mountains disintergrate and disappear in Alabama, there is a large and thick 
residual accumulation forming the surface of the earth, highly porous, that absorbs a 
large portion of the heavy rainfall of this section. The result is these conditions 
create an earthen storage or reservoir, which forms the source of the thousands of large 
springs found in this part of the valley, many of which are so large that mills are run 
by tneir branches. 

A careful study of the water discharge of the Coosa-Alabama River, covering over a 
period of a third of a century or more, demonstrates that as the years go by and the 
forests are denuded and the land put into cultivation contrary to the commonly 
accepted theory the floods have been reduced and the minimum discharge of this 
stream very materially increased. 

This rather unusual condition can be accounted for with a degree of certainty in 
this way: The thick and highly porous condition of the earth’s surface in the upper 
Coosa-Alabama River Valley, as the forests are cleared away and the land put into 
cultivation, the land being plowed and the surface thus being made more spongy, 
takes up more and more of the rainfall, hence the run-off is not so rapid, and as a result 
the impetuosity of the floods are decreased. 

On the other hand, the increased quantity of rainfall so absorbed by the earth, 
being emitted through the thousands of large limestone springs, thus increasing the 
discharge of these springs throughout the entire year, the low-water or minimum dis¬ 
charge of this river is exceptionally large, all of which are most potent factors in 
navigation and the development of power. 

On this condition in the upper Coosa-Alabama Valley Dr. Eugene A. Smith, State 
geologist of Alabama, in his treatise on “The Underground Water Resources of Ala¬ 
bama,” says: “While the rocks of this subdivision are not as a rule characterized by 
any serviceable degree of porosity, as will be seen later, yet they are all covered more 
or less completely by soils and other residual matters resulting from their decay and 
weathering, and these surface accumulations are fairly well adapted to the absorption 
and storage of the rainfall, so that springs and open wells are common throughout 
the area.” 

Dr. Smith also says: “Of much greater importance in this connection are the great 
limestone springs, or big springs, especially of the Knox dolomite and in less degree 
of the Tuscumbia (Lower Carboniferous) limestones. Both these limestones in some 
parts are highly siliceous or cherty, and like all limestones are traversed near the 
surface by fissures, channels, and caverns, formed or enlarged by the solvent action 
of the circulating waters, which also, dissolving the purer parts of the limestone, leave 
behind the chert in great open masses of the highest degree or permeability. In 
conseauence of these conditions much of the rainfall in these terranes finds its way 
sooner or later into the subterranean channels forming streams which emerge as big 
springs. _ It would be hardly possible to enumerate all the great limestone springs of 
this section.” 

The fact is, there is not a river in the United States on the headwaters of which the 
precipitation of rain is as large as that on the headwaters of the Coosa-Alabama, except 
two or three small rivers that emanate from the same region, neither is there a river 
in the. United States that flows through a district at all comparable with that of the 
upper OooRa-A)abaraa Valley for its thousands of great limestone springs, tributary to 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA BIVEES. 113 


this stream before it passes off into the coastal plain, hence the plienominally large 
minimum discharge of this river as compared with other streams emanating from 
mountainous regions. 

The upper portion of the Coosa-Alabama River from away above Rome, Ga., 
down to the head of the rapids above mentioned, a distance of about 250 miles, has 
been in successful navigation with light-draft boats for about 75 years, while the lower 
end, from the foot of the rapids to the Gulf of Mexico has been navigated for about 100 
years. There would be a continuous route of navigation over the entire length of this 
river, a distance of about 850 miles, were it not for the rapids about midway its length 
that cut navigation in twain. However, the navigation on both these sections of the 
river are more or less disturbed during low-water periods, which does not last over 60 
to 90 days, and this only occurs every few years. 

Former presentations verified .—In our efforts to get the Coosa-Alabama River opened 
to through navigation to the Gulf of Mexico, about 11 years ago, we compiled the 
resources of the Coosa-Alabama River Valley and presented it to the Congress of the 
United States in the form of a memorial. Since that time a supplement to this memo¬ 
rial was prepared, which has been used to a limited extent in advocating the opening 
of this stream to through navigation. The information contained in these presenta¬ 
tions was compiled with a great deal of care and in the course of time the correctness 
of the claims made therein has been surprisingly well supported, and it is very interest¬ 
ing to note the wonderful progress made in the Coosa-Alabama River Valley in the past 
11 years, by a comparison of these various compilations. Therefore, we shall not 
only take the privilege of quoting from these memorials right liberally, but we beg to 
resubmit them and ask that they be made a part of this presentation. 

COOSA-ALABAMA RIVER VALLEY. 

There are 25 counties in North Georgia and Alabama directly tributary to and form¬ 
ing the Coosa-Alabama River Valley. For convenience in this presentation we shall 
divide this valley into two sections, designating the section from Wetumpka, at the 
foot of the rapids up. as the upper Coosa-Alabama Valley, and from Wetumpka to the 
Gulf, through the coastal plain, as the lower part of the valley. 

While the benefits to be derived from the opening of the Coosa-Alabama River to 
through navigation to the Gulf of Mexico is national in its scope, and all Alabama, 
North Georgia, and a part of Tennessee will be directly benefited by this much-needed 
improvement, yet we shall rest our claims for the improvement of this stream chiefly 
upon the commerce and demands of these 25 counties. 

The climate of the Coosa-Alabama River Valley is mild and salubrious and the land 
wonderfully fertile. It possesses a population of about 750,000 happy souls, and 
they carry on diversified farming in every part of the valley with the most gratifying 
success. Cotton corn, wheat, oats, and stock are the principal products of the farm, 
cotton especially, for practically speaking, it is one vast cotton field from one end to 
the other, though almost every plant and vegetable that grows in the temperate zone 
is found here, and they inevitably thrive in proportion to the attention bestowed upon 
them. Manufacturing of every variety is also carried on very extensively, and the 
increase in this branch of industry for the past 10 years has been marvelous and the 
mineral resources of the valley are almost beyond* conception. 

MINERAL RESOURCES. 

It is safe to «av that there is found in the Coosa-Alabama River Valley the greatest 
combination and variety of rich and valuable minerals, in the closest proximity to 
each other, neatest, the seaboard of any part of the United States, and as we say, it is 
probably without a parallel in the world. Gold is found in Tallapoosa County and 
elsewhere, and at one time attracted a large population. Kaolin, yellow ocher, 
graphite, mica, and barite all appear in commercial quantities. Bauxite, or aluminum, 
ore is found here in great purity, and this is found in only one other place in the 
United States, but the predominating minerals found in the Coosa-Alabama Valley 
are, coal, clays shales, and limestone for cement making, marble, red, brown, and gray 
iron ores, and limestone for fluxing and fertilizing purposes. 

MARBLE. 

The marble of this valley is of an extra fine grade and is simply inexhaustible. 
This deposit of marble begins right on the bank of the Coosa-Alabama River in Talla¬ 
dega County and extends in a northeasterly direction about 60 miles. It forms what 
is known as the “ marble valley,” and is 3 to 4 miles wide and estimated to be about 
1,200 feet thick. This marble is now being extensively and profitably worked and 
those engaged in its development are anxiously seeking water transportation for this 
product to the Gulf. 

H. Doc. 251. 6:1-1-8 



114 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA EIVEBS. 


LIME. 

When we take into consideration the extent to which lime is used in the world’s 
progress, in connection with the fact that the lime deposits of the upper Coosa-Alabama 
River Valley are probably the richest and most extensive to be found anywhere in 
the United States, we can realize that this product demands more than a passing 
thought. Besides the use of lime for domestic purposes and sanitation, and regard¬ 
less of the present rate of freight, large quantities of lime are now shipped from the 
upper Coosa-Alabama Valley to the sugar refineries of Louisiana and the West Indies, 
where it is used very largely in the refining of sugar, and this market begins right 
where the waters of the Coosa-Alabama River, the object of this presentation, empty 
into the Gulf of Mexico. 

Lime is also a very valuable fertilizer for the sugar plant grown in Louisiana and the 
West Indies, but the present freight rates from the upper Coosa-Alabama Valley to 
this region make it impossible to reach this class of trade. If the Coosa-Alabama 
River were opened to through navigation to the Gulf, so river rates could be obtained, 
the tonnage on this product for a fertilizer would consequently be very heavy. 

CEMENT. 

The towering ranges of cliff-limestone of the upper Coosa-Alabama Valley, hanging 
over the river and valley hundreds of feet high, assay 98 to 100 per cent pure lime. 
This limestone is intermingled with inexhaustable beds of all the clays and shales 
necessary for the manufacture of a high-grade Portland cement. While these rich, 
raw materials exist in absolutely inexhaustable quantities, this branch of industry 
is yet in its infancy in this region, but is fast assuming proportions in keeping with 
its importance. 

One of the big cement plants of this region that sits practically right on the bank 
of the Coosa-Alabama River at Ragland, Ala., is now anxious to enter the export 
trade, and they have advanced a very original and unique plan for the exportation 
of their product. Cement, as is well known, is liable to damage and deteriorate when 
it is kept over any length of time or when shipped by ocean transportation. To over¬ 
come this trouble it is the purpose of these cement people to prepare, mix, and burn 
the cement material at their Ragland plant and ship this cement material in the 
clinker, unground, in bulk, and store and grind it at the points to which it is shipped 
as it is needed. By this means they will avoid water damage or deterioration entirely, 
as the material will not damage or deteriorate while in the clinker form. 

If the Coosa-Alabama River was opened to through navigation to the Gulf, this 
plant alone would now furnish 100 tons of commerce "per day for export. 

In support of this assertion, we attach hereto a letter from Mr. W. B. Schaeffer, presi¬ 
dent of the Atlantic & Gulf Portland Cement Co., of Ragland, Ala., the company 
that desires to make such shipments. The letter will explain itself, and we beg that 
you refer to same in connection herewith. 

IRON ORE. 

The available iron ore in sight within 40 miles of the Coosa-Alabama River is now 
estimated by experts at 1,075,000,000 tons. In addition to this, new discoveries are 
not only constantly being made, but as the work in the ore mines now in operation 
penetrate deeper into the earth all former estimates are invariably increased. 

IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY. 

The iron and steel industry of the Coosa-Alabama River Valley is now very exten¬ 
sive and increasing with great rapidity. Cast-iron pipe, stoves, and many other 
iron and steel products, all well adapted for export, are now very extensively shipped 
from this region, and the valley enjoys the distinction of being one of the very few 
sections of the United States in which the iron ore is taken from the earth practically 
from right under the shadow of the smokestacks of the great iron and steel furnaces 
and converted into finished iron and steel products ready for export to all parts of the 
world. 

This economic and complete process of conversion is carried on by the Southern 
Iron & Steel Co. at its Gadsden, Ala., plant, which is located on the Coosa-Alabama 
River above the rapids on this stream. 

The products of this great and complete plant consist of steel structural material, 
steel barbed and woven-wire fence, and steel-wire nails, and are taken from the iron 
ore and converted into these commodities all within one inclosure at the rate of 1 000 
tons per day. These products are all attractive for export, and the only thing now 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 115 

left to make this one of the most complete plants in the world in all of its relations is 
the opening of the ( oosa-Alabama River to through navigation, so as to give the great 
mass ol freight produced by this splendid plant water transportation to the Gulf for 
export, which it might be proper for us to say in this connection was the primary 
object m view when this plant was designed and built at this particular locality. 

If the Coosa-Alabama River can be opened to through navigation to the Gulf, it 
is the purpose of the owners of this great iron and steel industry to make Mobile, Ala., 
trm distributing point for all their products. To do this, it is their purpose not only 
to build large storage warehouses at Mobile from which to ship their products to all 
parts of the world, but to build boats and barges of sufficient capacity to transport 
these products from their plant at Gadsden to Mobile. This would give to be handled 
on this river from this plant alone, 1,000 tons per day. 

In si pport of these assertions we attach hereto a letter from the lion. Cecil A. Gren¬ 
fell, chairman of the executive committee of the Southern Iron & Steel Co., to which we 
call your special attention. 

While we have mentioned a few of the principal commodities of the Coosa-Alabama 
River \ alley that are now seeking water transportation to the Gulf for export, they are 
not by any means all. Cotton, cotton seed, cotton goods are now largely exported from 
this section, while cast-iron pipe, clay pipe, brick, stoves, and many other products 
are exported only to a limited extent. In all of these, the export trade cot Id be largely 
benefitted and very materially increased bv the opening of this river to through navi¬ 
gation to the Gulf. 

Hereto attached are a number of photographs showing the products of the Southern 
Iron & Steel Co., of Gadsden, Ala., in their various stages of manufacture, from the 
iron ore to the finished products ready for export. 

There are also hereto attached photographs showing parts of other manufacturing 
plants of the Coosa-Alabama River Valley, the products of which are waiting water 
transportation to the Gi If for export, together with several photographs showing scenes 
of navigation both above and below the rapids on this stream. These latter photo¬ 
graphs will give some idea of the extent to which navigation is now being carried on 
irrespective of the fact that this river is tied up in the middle. 

There is also attached hereto a map showing the average precipitation of rain through¬ 
out the I nited States, which will verify the claims made herein as to the precipitation, 
while Dr. Eugene A. Smith, State geologist of Alabama, a very high authority, is 
liberally quoted in support of the claims made herein as to the great number of large 
perpetual gushing limestone springs found in the upper Coosa-Alabama River Valley, 
all of which we pray that you make a part of this presentation and refer to same as 
often as in your wisdom you see proper. 

PRESENT PRODUCTION AND TONNAGE. 

It was our purpose and desire to lay before your honorable body a complete compila¬ 
tion of the commerce of the entire Coosa-Alabama River Valley reduced to tons and 
value, but we regret to say that we have been unable to obtain the tonnage of the 
lower part of the valley with any degree of accuracy, therefore we herewith give you 
the annual tonnage of the upper part of the valley in detail, and estimate that of the lower 
part of the valley from Wetumpka to the coast. 

The annual production of the upper Coosa-Alabama Valley, though still in its incip- 
iency as compared with the natural resources of this region, is as follows: 


Cotton. 

Cotton seed. 

Grain... 

Cattle, sheep, and hogs. 

Cotton-mill products. 

Iron and steel products. 

Other manufactured products 

Iron ore. 

Other minerals. 

Lime. 

Marble, 120,000 cubic feet. 

Coal. 

Coke consumed. 

Timber cut. 

Cement, 475,000 barrels. 

Fertilizers. 

Brick (paving). 


Tons. 


Value. 


55,165 
110,330 
409,725 
25,000 
56,430 
992,000 
1,536,400 
1,750,000 
50,000 
750,000 
10,800 
520,000 
814,000 
555,750 
95,000 
67,000 
225,000 


$13,239,600 
2,206,600 
9,105,000 
1,000,000 
22,015,000 
14,855,000 
52,651,000 
2,625,000 
150,000 
525,500 
420,000 
780,000 
1,628,000 
2,006,000 
475,000 
1,340,000 
900,000 


Total 


8,022,600 


125,921,700 





























116 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVEKS. 


RESOURCES OE THE UPPER VALLEY. 

Comparison , 1899-1910. 

By referring to page 17 of the original Coosa River Memorial of September 27, 
1899, a copy of which is hereto attached, it will be seen that the visible tonnage pro¬ 
duced in the upper Coosa-Alabama River Valley at that time was 3,861,525 tons per 
annum, valued at $52,816,000. 

Thus we have the following comparison for the 11-year period ending December 
31, 1910: 


Year. j Tonnage. 

Value. 

1910. 

1899. 

8,022,600 
3,861,525 

8125,921,700 
52,816,000 

Gain in 11 years. 

4,161.075 

73,105,700 


Per cent. 

108 

138 


In support of this tabulation we beg to refer you to the Manufacturers Record of 
date August 17, 1911. This journal gives the increased production in all Alabama 
for the year 1910 over the year 1900 at 103 per cent. 

As we are forced to estimate the tonnage of the lower Coosa-Alabama Valley from 
Wetumpka to the coast, and to enable you to realize more fully the importance of the 
commerce of this section, we shall quote from the reports of Capts. J. B. Cavanaugh 
and H. B. Ferguson, two well-known and able United States engineers, formerly 
having charge of the district through which this river flows. 

Capt. Cavanaugh, now Maj. Cavanaugh, in speaking of the lower Coosa-Alabama 
River, in his report of 1906 says: “The commerce of this stream is important, con¬ 
sisting principally of cotton, cotton seed, fertilizers, grain, lumber, shingles, naval 
stores, staves, and a large quantity of miscellaneous freight of all descriptions.” 

Capt. Ferguson, now Maj. Ferguson, in his report of 1908 practically reiterates the 
remarks of Maj. Cavanaugh. 

I It would be approximately correct to say that the commerce of the upper and 
lower Coosa-Alabama Valley are about equal in importance and value, but the ton¬ 
nage of the lower part of the valley is probably about two-thirds that of the upper 
valley. 

Conceding this estimate to be about correct, this gives us, produced in the Coosa- 
Alabama Valley annually, a total tonnage of 13,371,000 tons, valued at $251,843,400. 

RETURN FREIGHTS. 

In the ordinary exchange of commerce in return for these vast resources we must 
naturally have almost a like amount in value returned to the Coosa-Alabama Valley, 
though the articles so returned being in a more refined state, the tonnage on the 
incoming goods would probably be about half that of the outgoing. This gives us 
to be handled in the Coosa-Alabama Valley annually at the present time 20,056,500 
tons of commerce, valued at $503,686,800. 

FUTURE INCREASE. 

As we have undertaken to show you herein, the commerce of the Coosa-Alabama 
River Valley has more than doubled within the past decade, and with the stimulus 
that is destined to follow the opening of the Panama Canal the increase in the future 
of this section lying so favorably to the Gulf coast will undoubtedly be very much 
greater than that of the past, and especially will this be the case if the Government of 
the United States declares it its purpose to open the Coosa-Alabama River to through 
navigation to the Gulf. 

If the United States Government were to-day actively at work on this river, with 
a definite and fixed plan for its improvement, it would hardly be possible for it to 
accomplish this task within a shorter period than from 10 to 12 years, and by that 
time, judging the future by the past, giving proper allowance for the stimulus that 
would be given this section in view of the opening of this river to the Gulf, in con- 






















ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 117 


nection with the opening of the Panama Canal, the total commerce of the Coosa- 
Alabama River Valley, including the incoming freights, would reach the enormous 
proportions of not less than 36,000,000 tons per annum, valued at $900,000,000. 

PROPORTION ALLOTTED RIVER. 

It is hard to say just what percentage of this commerce would be handled on the river 
were it opened to through navigation to the Gulf, but it has been estimated on several 
occasions that 20 per cent would be so transported. In view of an export trade which 
we deemed inevitable from this region, 11 years ago when we compiled the origi¬ 
nal Coosa River memorial, we estimated then that 20 per cent of the commerce of 
this valley was destined to be handled on this river, were proper navigation facili¬ 
ties extended through to the Gulf. We beg now to say that time has strengthened our 
belief in the correctness of this proportion, for the rapidly increasing export trade in 
recent years, and in view of the stimulus that will be given this trade by the opening 
of the Panama Canal, together with the great stores of commerce that are now knock¬ 
ing at the gateways of this river for transportation to the Gulf for export, we think 
fully justifies this estimate. 

Conceding these estimates to be approximately correct, were the Government 
actively at work to-day, with approved and fixed plans for the improvement of this 
river before this task could possibly be accomplished, the proportion of commerce 
that would be ready for transportation over this great water highway, including inter¬ 
mediate freights, as well as freights to and from the Gulf port, would be approximately 
7,200,000 tons per annum. 

This would give 19,727 tons daily to be handled on this river, and would require 
66 steamers or 66 barges per day of 300 tons burden each. 

It may be claimed that the foregoing conclusions are visionary, but when we take 
into consideration the great stores of natural resources found in the Coosa-Alabama 
River Valley, so favorably situated for exporting, and judging the future progress of 
the valley by the past, together with its present demands, we must insist that our con¬ 
clusions are not overdrawn. 

In support of the above conclusions we attach hereto a supplement embracing not 
only large amounts of commerce guaranteed to be handled on the river if the Govern¬ 
ment will open it to through navigation, but also guaranteeing modern wharves 
at Rome, Ga., Gadsden, and Ragland, Ala., to which we call your special attention. 
In this connection we also beg to again call attention to the letters of Hon. Cecil 
A. Grenfell and Mr. W. B. Schaeffer hereto attached. 

IMPROVEMENT OF NAVIGATION BY STORAGE. 

The improvement of navigation on inland rivers by conserving or impounding the 
flood waters in reservoirs has proved to be a great success wherever tried, and this mode 
of improvement is now attracting very favorable attention. 

This plan of improvement is a source from which three great and lasting benefits 
may be derived, and these are: 

First. The improvement of navigation. 

Second. The amelioration of flood conditions. 

Third. The increased development of power, where water power is possible. 

In all cases where rivers have been improved by reservoiring we find that the bene¬ 
fits to navigation have not only been most gratifying, but that the impetuosity of the 
floods has been decreased, hence the benefits from this character of improvement 
are, in this way, invariably twofold, and where water powers are possible, the benefits 
would be threefold. 

We understand fully that the Government of the United States can only be inter¬ 
ested in navigation, but where conditions are favorable, and there is nothing to be 
lost and all to be gained by a triple development of this kind, good stewardship would 
demand that this character of improvement be made. 

The Inland Waterways Commission, after a careful study of the various plans for 
the improvement of our rivers, not only indorse the reservoir plan of improvement 
most heartily but recommends that the improvement of the Ohio be largely accom¬ 
plished in this way. 

The Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association, recognizing the great 
benefits to navigation, as well as the amelioration of the flood conditions that have 
been accomplished by the limited storage system at the head of the Mississippi, now 
strenuously advocates the enlargement of the reservoir system for the improvement 
of this stream, and says that it is “the most important question that can come before 
the association.” 


118 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA EIVEBS. 


Thomas and Watt tells us that the reservoir system at the heads of the Volga and 
Msta Rivers in Russia are a great success in both navigation and the amelioration of 
the flood conditions, and we are often pointed to this development as a model. 

Why should Russia be held up as a pattern for the balance of the world for her model 
river improvement when it conserves only two of the benefits which many of our 
waterways are capable of bestowing upon a people? Why not the United States 
take the initiative in a model triple development and set an example for the balance 
of the world? The Coosa-Alabama River in Georgia and Alabama is an ideal stream 
for such a development, for its tributaries, cutting through the mountains of north 
Georgia, form three desirable reservoir sites at which reservoirs can be economically 
developed of sufficient capacity not only to relieve the impetuosity of the floods, 
but to maintain, with some light jetty work, from 7 to 8 feet of navigation on the flat 
parts of this river both above and below the rapids on this stream at all times, as well 
as to treble the already large water-power possibilities where this river passes off over 
these rapids into the coastal plain. 

The reservoirs at the head of the Volga and Msta Rivers in Russia, that have been 
so successful in aiding navigation and the amelioration of the flood conditions on 
those rivers, we are told have a capacity of 35,000,000,000 cubic feet of water. 

One of the three reservoirs on the head of the Coosa-Alabama River has a capacity 
of 42,000,000,000 cubic feet of water. 

There is a very wide difference in the cost of impounding reservoirs. They cost 
all the way from 50 cents to $400 per acre-foot. The average cost seems to be from 
$10 to $20 per acre-foot. It is estimated that the principal reservoir on the head of 
the Coosa-Alabama River will cost $4 per acre-foot. 

In support of these averments we cite you to the report of the Inland Waterways 
Commission of 1908, and also to the report of the Board of United States Engineers, 
consisting of Maj. H. M. Chittendon, Maj. Charles L. Potter, and Capt. W. B. Judson, 
found in the report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States, 1906, and to B. F. 
Thomas and D. A. Watt on the Improvement of Rivers, and James Dix Schuyler on 
Reservoirs. 

WATER POWER. 

The fall in the Coosa-Alabama River from Greensport, Ala., to Wetumpka, the 
section in which the rapids occur in this river, is 370 feet in a distance of 142 miles. 
The big rapids on the river, however, are from the head of Weduska Shoals, about 10 
miles below Talladega Springs, to Wetumpka. In this section the river falls 250 
feet in 48 miles. The amount of power that can be developed from the fall and the 
water discharge over the rapids on this river without the conservation of the flood 
waters is about 150,000 horsepower. 

It is true the development of water power is appurtenant to State and riparian 
ownership and not within the jurisdiction of the United States Government. But, 
if the plans for the improvement of this river are designed with the view of develop¬ 
ing the water power of the stream in connection with its improvement for navigation, 
and the Government of the United States will take proper cognizance of the water¬ 
power rights on the river and cooperate with individuals or capital in a liberal policy 
for a dual development of both navigation and power upon such terms as would be 
equitable, right, and just to all interests concerned, great economy can be accom¬ 
plished in both the improvement of the river and its operation thereafter. 

In addition to this the development of water power in connection with the improve¬ 
ment of this river for navigation would make the whole system, we might properly 
say, reciprocal in its effects, from the fact that the commerce that the water powers 
would be capable of producing right on the bank of the river, and which they would 
undoubtedly be producing in a very short time, would largely, if not wholly, justify 
the Government in its expenditure for the improvement of navigation. 

Raw material, energy, and transportation are the three principal factors of all 
industrial progress. It will be observed that the Coosa-Alabama River itself can 
most effectively and economically supply two of these essential factors, energy and 
transportation, while the third, raw material, abounds in the greatest profusion. 

As we have hereinbefore undertaken to show, the upper Coosa-Alabama River 
Valley is rich from one end to the other with all the minerals necessary for the manu¬ 
facture of iron and steel, and it passes within easy reach of the Great Birmingham 
district, in which these natural resources are found in great quantities. 

The entire valley is also, practically speaking, one rich and vast cotton field, the 
plant ofiwhich not only demands a great deal of fertilizing, but inevitably yields in 
proportion to the rich fertilizers bestowed upon it. 

The most modern mode of producing iron and steel for their uses and nitrogen for 
fertilizers is accomplished by electricity generated by water power, and this promises 


ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 119 


soon to become the most economic way of producing these commodities. Therefore, 
the abundance of rich raw material for iron and steel making in such close proximity 
to the great water power possible on the Coosa-Alabama River, the manufacture of 
iron and steel, and the manufacture of the finished products of iron and steel by elec¬ 
tricity generated by the mighty force of this stream is destined to be a great factor in 
the new era for the manufacture of these commodities. 

Then, too, with the world dependent on the South for cotton with which to clothe 
the people, the manufacture of atmospheric nitrogen for fertilizers right in the midst 
of the cotton field is a consummation devoutly to be wished by the world at large. 

If there is any one branch of industry that needs stimulating right at this particular 
time it is agriculture. The manufacture of nitrogen for fertilizers by the water that 
is now going to waste over the great rapids on the Coosa-Alabama River, right in the 
midst of the cotton field, where, by the use of this nitrogen four bolls of cotton may 
be grown where we now grow one, and other things in proportion, the employment of 
a part of this power in this branch of industry, as well as in the fabrication of the 
cotton itself, promises the most gratifying results. 

INDUSTRIAL PROGRESS. 

The industrial progress of the United States has reached a stage where its produc¬ 
tion is so far in advance of its home market that it must now look out for a more liberal 
share of the world’s trade than ever before, and this, too, comes right at the time when 
competition was never more sharp or keen. Among the many commodities that are 
now being produced so largely in excess of our home market are iron and steel prod¬ 
ucts, such as abound in the Coosa-Alabama Valley. While these commodities are 
being produced so largely in excess of our own home market, we find the Pacific 
slope of our country being invaded by Chinese iron, made by the cheap labor of 
China, costing probably not over 10 cents per day. The Pacific slope has placed 
only recently large orders with Chinese merchants for iron made in China, the delivery 
of which is to cover over a period of seven years. The question arises now, how are 
we to meet these conditions and overcome them. One thing that will largely relieve 
this situation is to open the navigable rivers from the great iron and steel districts of 
Alabama to tidewater so as to give this rich and fertile section cheap water transporta¬ 
tion to the coast for export, thereby enabling this region not only to better meet the 
competition of China on our Pacific slope through the Panama Canal, but to dispose 
of its products more liberally in foreign markets, which would soon take Alabama’s 
great stores of commerce largely out of competition with her sister States not so favor¬ 
ably situated for exporting and leave the latter to enjoy a more liberal home market. 

While water transportation is of great advantage and very necessary in all classes 
of trade, it serves its greatest purpose when its use will aid, encourage, or stimulate 
an export trade. 

A nation is rich or poor in proportion as the balance of trade is for or against it; 
therefore, a water highway which aids or encourages an export trade, bestows benefits 
that are nation wide, while one that serves a local purpose only bestows benefits that 
are more local. Both these purposes are very important and necessary, yet one is 
more of a national benefit, while the other is of a local benefit. 

So thoroughly are these facts realized and appreciated by some of the European 
nations that they discriminate between their domestic trade and their export trade 
in favor of the latter. 

Germany, for instance, a country that owns and controls both its rail and water 
highways, not only operates them so as to promote the development of the nation by 
adjusting rates so as to give the German manufacturer the advantage in his home 
market, but they make a difference between domestic and export rates in favor of 
the export trade. Then, too, the water highways of Germany have been improved 
until the water transportation facilities of that country are far ahead of the United 
States. As a result, with all these advantages, notwithstanding the fact that the 
natural resources and area of territory of the German Empire are not comparable 
with those of the United States, yet with such national encouragement as this, Ger¬ 
man exports now exceed those of the United States by over five hundred millions of 

dollars per annum. . . 

The trade of the United States up to this t'me of its existence, comparatively speak¬ 
ing, has been almost wholly domestic; therefore, the trade lines leading to our own 
commercial centers have been most important and most liberally provided. The 
commercial progress of the United States, however, has now reached a stage where 
we must aid, encourage, and foster our export trade more than ever before, and to do 
this there is nothing that would contribute more to the upbuilding of this trade than 


120 ETOWAH, COOSA, TALLAPOOSA, AND ALABAMA RIVERS. 


the opening of our water highways, from the sections nearest and most convenient 
and favorable for this character of trade to the seaboard. 

The present condition of the commerce of the United States demands this, and the 
future progress of the country demands it; therefore it is a national necessity, a national 
duty, a duty that our Government should feel was compulsory upon it to discharge. 

Respectfully submitted. 

W. P. Lay. 

J. M. Elliott, Jr. 

Frank D. Kohn. 

Gordon Lee. 

J. W. Hancock, 

Mayor , City of Rome, Ga. 

John L. Burnett, 

Member of Congress , Seventh Alabama District. 

October 26, 1911. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. 

o 


A 




































- 





, •. 



, .. 



■» • • • 


















■ 










































• 









. • 













. 










































































































INDEX OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 


Illustration. 

Map 1. 

Map 5. 

Map 6. 

Map 7, page. 

Map 8. 

Map 9. 

Map 9, sheet A.. 

Map 10. 

Map 10, sheet A. 

Map 11. 

Map 11, sheet A. 

Map 12. 

Map 12, sheet A. 
Map 12, sheet B. 


No. 


Map 12, sheet C. 

Map 12, sheet D. 

Map 12, sheet E. 
Map 12, sheet F.. 


Map 13. 

Map 13, sheet A. 

Map 13, sheet B. 

Map 13, sheet C./_ 

Map 13, sheet D. 

Map 13, sheet E. 

Table 1. 


Drawing 1 


Drawing 2. 


Drawing 2^. 
Drawing 3.. 


Drawing 4. 


1 

2 

3 
31 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 
9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 
21 
22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 


Drawing 5. 

Drawing 6. 

Drawing 7. 

Drawing 8. 

Drawing 9. 
Drawing 10 

Drawing 11 

Drawing 12 

Drawing 13 


30 


31 


32 


33 


34 

35 


36 


37 

38 

39 


Drawing 14 
Drawing 15 


40 

41 


Drawing 16.j 42 


Description. 


General map, Alabama, river and tributaries. 

Iron ores in Georgia, Appendix B. 

| Bauxite in Georgia, Appendix B. 

Manganese in Georgia, Appendix B. 

Ocher in Georgia, Appendix B. 

Reservoir site No. 1, Tallapoosa River. 

Dam and spillway, No. 1, Tallapoosa River. 

Reservoir site No. 2, Tallapoosa River. 

Dam and spillway, No. 2, Tallapoosa River. 

Reservoir site, Conasauga River, Tenn. and Ga. 

Darn and spillway, Conasauga River, Tenn. and Ga. 

Reservoir site, Etowa River above Cartersville, Ga. 

Dam and spillway, Etowa River. 

Etowa River reservoir, cross sections of dam and spill¬ 
way. 

Etowa River reservoir, proposed core wall embank¬ 
ment at Allatoona Station. 

Etowa River reservoir, proposed earth embankment at 
M. P. No. 38. 

Etowa River reservoir, revision of W. & A. R. R. 

Etowa River reservoir, railroad features at and near 
Canton, Ga. 

Coosa River, Gadsden, Ala., to Wetumpka, Ala. 

Coosa River at Lock 2, showing location of proposed 
canal and lock. 

Coosa River, Dam site 18, proposed canal and locks. 

Coosa River, cross sections at dam site 12. 

Coosa River, cross sections at dam site 14. 

Coosa River, cross sections at dam site 15. 

Rainfall, run-off and slope, Alabama-Coosa Rivers 
watershed above Selma, Ala. 

Flowage of Etowa River near Cartersville, Ga., and 
shortage of Alabama River at Montgomery, Ala. 

Shortage or amount of storage required to maintain ga uge, 
as shown. 

Mean monthly discharge of Etowa River at dam. 

Alabama River basin, rainfall, run-off, and tempera¬ 
ture, 1897-1907. 

Alabama River basin, rainfall, run-off, and tempera¬ 
ture, 1897. 

Alabama River basin, rainfall, run-off, and tempera¬ 
ture, 1904. 

Alabama River at Selma, Ala., shortage or storage re¬ 
quired to maintian flowage. 

Alabama River at Montgomery, Ala., shortage or storage 
required to maintain flowage. 

Coosa River at Riverside, Ala., shortage or storage re¬ 
quired to maintain flowage. 

Coosa River at Riverside, Ala., 1904, storage required. 

Alabama River at Montgomery, Ala., 1904, storage re¬ 
quired. 

Mean monthly discharge, Tallapoosa River, Ala., at 
Dam No. 1, Cherokee Bluff. 

Combined Tallapoosa and Coosa shortage. 

Cross sections of various high dams. 

Typical cross section of proposed reservoir dam on Etowa, 
Tallapoosa, and Conasauga Rivers. 

Cost of dams, flooded lands, etc. 

Etowa River reservoir, diagram of discharge through 
proposed spillway of dam. 

Tallapoosa River reservoir No. 1, diagram showing 
height of pool level in reservoir above crest of spillway. 


122 































































MAP 1 



TABLE or DISTANCES a ELEVATIONS. 


Station. 

M/LESvia river 
•from MOBILE. 

ELEVATIONS 
above Sea Level. 

Canton, G a. 


744 

8 60.0 0 

Cartersville, Go 


7 1 3 

68 1 .50 

Rome, Go 


6 6 7 

562.0 O 

Horseted Lk.Cproposed upper poo\J 

662 

565.00 

•' " •• lower 

ii 

662 

554.00 

Gadsden, A la. 


5 33 

486.59 

Lock I Upper- poo 

1. 

5 1 O 

4 83.30 

«i 2. " • 


50 7 

477.97 

„ 3 « n 


506 

472.40 

If A M 1* 


4 85 

454.30 

Riverside, Ala 


4 8 1 

444. 30 

Lock 5. (proposed upper pool.) 

4 74 

444. 30 

• i i* « 

it 

465 

4 37.00 

" 7. n " 

n 

4 6 1 

42 1.00 

" 5 H » 


457 

408.00 

" 9 n •• 


4 49 

400.00 

» | o. 

H 

42 S 

389.00 

h II. 


4 1 4 

372.00 

]2.. » » 

II 

40 9 

350.00 

■i 13. • » 

R 

405 

3 1 4.0 0 

•• 14. * 

H 

400 

278.00 

- 15 

If 

3 88 

25 1 .00 

it | (o. *« " 

»l 

383 

2 1 6.00 

17. 

M 

3 80 

1 93.00 

•18. • • 

M 

376 

1 72.00 

" 19 * 

•1 

3 7 1 

1 52.00 

•• 20. • • 

It 

369 

1 30.00 

VVetumpka, Ala. 


369 

1 1 4.67 

Montgomery, Ala 
Selma, Ala. 


340 

1 OO. 1 5 


258 

59.50 

Haines Island. 


1 37 

40. 35 

Mo bil e, Ala. 


O 

0.00 


7H£ NORRIS PZTtLRS CO.. WASHINGTON, D. C. 


ETOWAH, COOSA, & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
‘ PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 1909. 

U. S. Engineer Office. ^ n 

Montgomery, Ato. June l s s 1909 

To occompony report of this date. 

Capt. Corp^yf Enqr's. U.S.A. 

House Doc. Ko. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 














































































IDEVON 




Scale 


3 Miles 


250 ft. Contours above tide . 




LEGEND 


1111111 

wMm 


Coal 

Measures 


Floyd Shale 


Chattanooga 
Black Shale 


ffffg# GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF GEORGIA 

m 11/ 

IHI / W. S.YEATES, State Ceolocist 


Red Mountain 


Ch ickamauga 
Limestone& Slate! 


MAP 

SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF 


Knox Dolomite 


THE IRON ORES 


Oostanaula Shale 


BARTOW.POLK 8 rFLOYD COUNTIES 


[j^Quarlzite 5 

I Iron Ore 


S.W McCALLIE 


~HE NORRIS PETERS fO-, WASHINGTON. D. C. 































































































































































































































































































































































Baux/Ze //? Georg/'a, /E/oiva, Coosa a/xf/ZZ/opoasD/tfi/ers, ZZeZ/Zr//7a/y^x<7mZwZ)v/r, /ttyorGofJcc^Z ZG09.-AZ/fP ZZd &. 



101M X- 

■CHffT'h 




\Kn 


Chic xamauja 


Z/ mm/ir tax jg 

'7mmc cd. Jest 


. ■ - Z- . 


Ootorrite 

Conp4sciu<1& 


‘ktuxrth 


laiCedartem 


Stale 



Mao show-ill? the Distribution of the Bauxite Deposits of Georgia. 

House Doc. No. 253 


63d Cong., 1st Sess. 









































































































Oc/?er /o Geory/a; £fowo, Coosa ootf To/Zo/dooso /P/yerS. M/IFf/O.Q. 
f’s'e/Z/n/nor# JS'xo/n/vaf/o/? f?e/?or/~ of fc/oe/, /SOS. . f/p/?e/ 7 c//x. "Z3 " 



House Doc. Ho. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 
























































































































































































































House Doc. Ho. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 





























































































MAP NO. 9 
SHEET - A. 


MAP OF 

DAM & SPILLWAY SITE 

ON THE 

TALLAPOOSA RIVER Nff I 


CHEROKEE BLUFFS 



THE NORTHS PITERS CO.. WASHINGTON, D. C 


1 


ETOWAH COOSA A TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 

SURVEY OF 1909 



•400 — 


O/Asc. 

/Wv/ifyasrrerY. f?/a.Jejr>&- /O* /9/0 
acce/r7/7crny re/?or~f' of fh/s cfotc 

Ca/i/o/n Corps of frry/neer $ if. 5. A. 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 






































































































































































U. S. Engineer Office 

Montgomery, /Il/i., June JO, 19/0. 

To accompany report of /bis date. 

75 ^ 4 , 

Cap fain CaEpsfof Engineers, U. S/). 


House Doc. Ho. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


BURROWS 


FERRY 


MAP NO. lO 


ETOWAH COOSA TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 

SURVEY OF 1909. 


MAP OF 

RESERVOIR SITE No. 2 

TALLAPOOSA RIVER 


At Mouth of Little Tallapoosa River 




FROM SURVEY MADE AUG. 15 TO OCT. 20, 1909. 

UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 

CAPTAIN H. B. FERGUSON, CORPS OF ENGINEERS U. S. A. 

B V' 

D. M. ANDREWS ASST. ENGR., O. E. YOUNG JUNIOR ENGR., CHIEF OF PARTY. 


SCALE OF FEET 

5000 

>■- ■ I —f " 


lOOOO 

=d 


CONTOUR INTERVALS, 20 FEET. ELEVATIONS REFER TO MEAN SEA LEVEL. 


CO-. 



















































MAP NO. 10 
SHEET — A 


ETOWAH, COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 



SCALE 


ISO 0 500 1000 

-- 

Contour intervals JO feet. 
£/eva toons refer fo M- S'. Level. 


20JI0 FEET 


U. 5. ENO/NEEff orr/CE 

MON TGOMEff Y, ALA June JO./9/O 
To accompany report of t/>/$ o/aJe. 

CafrO/h offpffors U-S. 


IS PETKRS CO.. WASHINGTON, D. C. 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


rto- 






































































MAP NO. 11. 


ETOWAH COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 

SURVEY OF 1900. 


MAP OF RESERVOIR SITE 

CONASAUGA RIVER TENN. d. GA. 

AT MOUTH OF JACK RIVER 


FROM SURVEY MADE SEPT. 15 TO OCT. 15, 1909. 

UNDER THE DIRECTION *OF 


CAPTAIN H. B. FERGUSON, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. 

BY 

D. M. ANDREWS ASST. ENGR., P. D. FUQUA JUNIOR ENGR. CHIEF OF PARTY. 

SCALE OF FEET 


1000 900 0 


SCALE OF MILES 

o '/6 Va 


CONTOUR INTERVALS 20 FEET 
ELEVATIONS REFER TO MEAN SEA LEVEL 


POLK CO. 


GEORGIA 



U. S. Engineer OrncE 

Montgomery, /Ilr., dun e /o, /909 
To accompany report c/afe. 



** ,S Pere/? sco., wash t ncton o /• 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 






















































































House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


THi NOK*!S PF 7 E*S CO.. WASH INCTOH , P. C 


MAP NO. 11 
SHEET A 


PROPOSED DAM & SPILLWAY SITE 


ON THE 

CONASAUGA RIVER 


SCALE OF FEET 

200 300 

-L-- .. 1 


U 5 . Eng/ncfr Off/ce 

Montgomery, /Pla., UOPB /O, fS/O. 

7o accompany repor/ of /his do/e 

Capfa/n CofpsJ of Engineers, USA. 


ETOWAH COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909. 


MAP OF 





































































= —=- -- = 

ETOWAH, COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 


SURVEY OF 1909 


COBB CO. 


CHEROKEE CO 


MAP OF 

RESERVOIR SITE 

ETOWAH RIVER 
ABOVE CARTERSVILLE. GA. 

FROM SURVEY MADE JULY 27, TO DEC. 13,1909 
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 
CAPTAIN H. B. FERGUSON, 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. 

BY 

D. M. ANDREWS, ASSISTANT ENG’R. J. D. TRUSS. JUNIOR ENG'r. CHIEF OF PARTY. 


1000 0 


S CAL E —F E ET 

5000 


13000 


SCALE—MILES 


CONTOUR INTERVALS, 20 FEET UP TO 8«0, ABOVE 860, 10 FEET. ELEVATIONS REFER TO MEAN SEA LEVEL 


U. S. En gineer Office, 
Montgom ery, Ala. 

7o accompany report of June JO\ 1910 


Captain Corpsfgf Engineers, U. S.A. 

House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


THE NORRIS FETE RS CO.. WASHINOTON. D. C. 


CANTON 


MAP NO. 12 

























































































































































THE NORRIS PETERS CO., WASHINGTON. D. C. 


MAP NO. 12 
SHEET — A 


ETOWAH COOSA 4& TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909 


Etowah Riv. Reservoir 


MAP OF 

DAM &. SPILLWAY SITE 


ON THE 


ETOWAH RIVER 


U. S. Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala. Jar/e 10,1910 
To accompany report of this date. 

Coptain Cor prof Engineers, U. s. A 


SCALE FEET 


500 


400 


ZOO 


<3 00 


House Doc. No. 2«53 ; 63d Cong., 1st Soss. 






































































































































































£/evaf/'ons\ Feej- • 






























































































































































































MAP NO. 12 
SHEET D 


ETOWAH COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 

SURVEY OF 1909 


Etowah Riv. Reservoir 

MAP OF 

PROPOSED EARTH EMBANKMENT 


AT 


M- P. NO. 38 W.&A. R.R 


too 


SCALE OF FEET 
200 300 


400 


500 


* 




ch° 




or 




,8^. 




-ft; 




ty 




V / 


S 


// 


«> 


v 


V 


\°A 




4 


«> 


«> 


*Y 


•x° 

H e 


\V 






<j> 


X/J 


//// 


// 


w 


/// 

/V 

v# 

. o' \ 0 0 x 

v \ 










°s>£> 




y 




o/ 


0 


00 , 


vO 


*\ 


> Z 


U. S. Engineer Office, 

Mqntgomef!y, Ala. June ! 0 , / 9/0 
To accompany report of this date. 

dT/Zdr* 

Captain Corps/of Engineers, U S. A. 


House Dqc. Ho. 253 ; ®3d Cong., lot S«ss. 


THt MO**l% AgltHi CO . WASMNCIOH. D- C 

































MAP NO. 12 
SHEET - B 





ETOWAH COOSA dr TALUAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909. 


900 


ETOWAH RIVER RESERVOIR. 

Prosed Revision Of W. &A.R.R. 

Near Allatoona, Ga. 


75 Carders v/lle, 


- ES T! MAT E - 


5 Acres C/earing & Grubbing 

4 

®50.00 

*.250.00 

24540 Cu. Yds S.ff. Excov. 

, .75 

ti.405.00 

24540 » „ L P. •> 

. .40 

9 8/6.00 

57500 .. ., Earth » 

. .25 

/4375.00 

/2 700 *> »> *» Borrow 

, .75 

3/75.00 

290000 ’> » Stas. Overhaul 

. .0/4 

362500 

58 hr. Tf. 24" CJ.fi in place 

. 3.00 

774.00 

500O Cu.Yds. ffa/tast in p/oce 

, too 

5000.00 

4/00 Cross Ties, c/e/iv. 

, .60 

2460.00 

ZT2 Tans fid t/aits 

> 35.00 

7770.00 

Spi/res 8 Pail Joints 


80000 

Uaut/np Materia / to p/oce 

(? 600.00 

500.00 

/EC M. 7rock laying 

930.00 

Moving/ A//a toana lie pet 


300.00 

Pood Crossinfs. Etc. 


500.00 

land Damage 


2500.00 

/00 Id- ids Concrete Ca/vert Peadna/ls 
Engineering 8 Contingencies, 10% 
7o la/ Cost. 

<? 8.00 

80000 

7/58.00 


/ /S 5/8.00 


- CoMpansoN W//th Present Track. - 

Aresinf Track Preposed Charge, 

fa/,cat Lift 40.00 /i.Of 

length 7/35.00 , 8 1 / 5 .DO f 

Currofure 257° 00 254“ 44 

Mar Curve <5° 36' 3> 50 

Mar Trade 0.6/70 0.45% 


Revision 


Proposed 


Profi le 


OF 


u 5 engineer Office 
/Montgomery, Ala June ro, re/o 
To accompany report of this date 

7^ S3 

Copfain Carps oMfnginecrs, u. SA. 















































































































































































ETOWAH, COOSA <Sr TALLAPOOSA 
SURVEY OF 1909. 


Etowah Riv. Reservoir 

/P. /?. Features at ana near 

Canton , Ca. 

"Survey of July 27 -Dec./ 3, / 909 
scale 800 - l " 


U S. Engine ep Office, 

Montgomery, Ala. Juno to, /9/0 

To accompany report of This dale 


Capfafn Crjrps' orj Engineers, 0. S. A 


,pc ho*kis pi reus co.. WAsntnamn. o. c 


















































MAP NO. 13 


ETOWAH. COOSA c£ TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 


FROM 


NETUMPKA TO 

wr 


SURVEY OF 1909 

nr 



inr 


A/AV/GAT/O N 

POWER 

Forage 

Darn 

Feer 

Lift 

L Ow Wafer 

Feet 

High 

ret 

Waiter 

t 

Effective 

Power Up net 

Ponda.ce & 

reer 

NS 

L W 

Upper Pool 

Lower Pool 

Upper Pool 

Lower Pool 

Feet 

Total. 

Pbnda ye 

Storage 

2 

IS 

527.00 

5/200 

525 00 

5/8.50 

26 

8 0 

0 33 

7.67 

3 

lb 

5/2 00 

49600 







4 

13 

49520 

482.30 

509 50 

50400 





5 

73 

43220 

41500 

493.00 

490.00 





6 

29 

4 75-00 

446 00 

48500 

464 00 

29 




7 

S 

446.00 

43800 

4 59.00 

456.00 





8 

/ / 

438.00 

42700 

452.50 

44000 





9 

n 

42700 

410.00 

435.00 

425 00 





10 

5Q 

4/0.00 

352 00 

420 50 

366 00 

63 

too 

0.4 / 

9.59 

/ / 

55 

352.00 

2 97.00 

362.50 

3/8-50 

50 




/ 2 

43 

2 97.00 

254.00 

3/000 

270 00 

42 

50 

0.84 

4 lb 

13 

64 

25400 

190.00 

267.00 

209.00 

63 

6 0 

0.80 

5.20 

Id 

22 

19000 

168.00 

203.50 

199.00 





15 

15 33 

/6b 00 

152- 6 7 

196 00 

19550 






Note 

4 flight of fuso Locks each is provided 
at Dams IO ) II, /8 & /3 

The. old numbers of fhe report of 1305 
ate given in brackets, ( j 


0 5 E ng'Neer Office 

MoNTGOMERy An i June /O. 19/0 

/o accompany reporf of/pis date 


C a plain C 


s of Engineers USA. 


- tdo 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 













































































































































































































































































































































































































U. S Engineer Office , 

Montgomery, Ala. June / OJ9I0. 

To accompany report of this date. 

-W3ekx 

Captain Corps ffEngineers, U S A 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


4-60 


MAP NO. 13 

SHEET — A 


ETOWAH COOSA <& TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909 


COOS/1 


oP/VU 


TOPOPFFF/V/CFL AMP OF B4ST B/ff/K 
OFFOOS/7 P//FPFF10CF*// 

F/otvFy locof/on of Prof>osec/ loo* Zero*/Sr looAr CZv/vAsas 

£>R£r&7?Apr y /SOS. 


/oo 

I 


■Sca/e of Eaef 
zoo 300 


400 

— I— 


SOO 

J 


N \\<^ 

x v^ 


X %3 




\\r. 








































































































MAP NO. 13 


ETOWAH, COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 


SURVEY OF 1909 


Coosa River. 

Detail Topography Dam site 18 
Proposed Cana! and Locks. 


U. S ■ Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala., June/o, 1910 
To accompany report of this dale. 


'of Engineers, U S A 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Soss. 













































MAP NO. 13 
SHEET — C 


ETOWAH. COOSA <£ TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909. 



THE "ORRIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON. D. C 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Se 

























































































































































































































<'5 HORRIS PETERS CO., WASH! MOTOR, O. C. 


House Doc. Ho. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 







































































































































































































---—7^ ' ETOWAH, COOSA <£ TALLAPOOSA RTVI 

map NO. lo 

SHEET — E SURVEY OF 1909 


'I 


.1 
































































































































































TABLE 1 


SrA.T/ O N 

Cleveland, Tenn. 
Dahlonega, 6a 
Diamond, Ga. 
Gainsville. 6a. 
Alpharetta, 6a. 
Canton, Ga. 
Adairville, 6a. 
Atlanta, 6a. 
Tallapoosa, 6a 
Rome, Ga. 

Ramsey, Ga. 

Re sac a, Ga. 
Gpeenbush, Ga. 
Valleyhead, Ala. 
Maple Grove, Ala- 
Gadsden, Ala. 
Ashville, Ala 
Anniston, ala. 

Lock A, Ala 
Talladega, Ala. 
Birmingham, Ala 
Gooowatep, Ala. 
Clanton, Ala. 
Wetumpka, Ala 
/Yennan, 6a. 
Rochm/lls, Ala. 
Opelina, Ala. 
Tallassee, Ala. 
Union Springs, Ala. 
Montgomery, Ala. 
Fort Deposit, Ala. 
Selma, Ala. 

To Ta l. a 


table op Annual Rainfall Run-off and Slope, Alabama a-Coosa River watershed above Selma Ala. 

Including Discharge and Gage Heights at Selma. 

Rote — Figures with * ore interpolated, no rain/b/t being recorded. 


Area 
Sg. Miles 


Xi? 


1896 

Annual Rainfall Mean 

Rainfall Inch Miles Discharge Runoff 
Inches t) .atn «*■[ Sec Fee t 

/ 33 76 
41 67 
2 /S 06 
' 4/47 

i 7/04* 

>34748 
/ 43 68 
38 S6 

• 64989 
2 6482 
2 !4 30 

> 9509 

1*2 0700 
/ 08 SO 
2 6330 
>. 7 4292 
/ 0 0 54 
2 33 63 
/ S3 86 

, 26537. 

97 63 
48 / 89 
384 73 
2/0 67 

* 80 OO 
*2 6837 

/ 70 /3 
.34440 
3/3 61 
3/4 78 
/ 8 2 00 
/ 89 / 9 


1897 


1898 


1899 




Annua/ 

Rainfa// 

I nches 

49.76 

53.76 
59.9! 
50.32 
43.34 

46.44 
46-72 
39.26 
41.06 
48.OS 
52. 45 
50.00 
52.00 
54.30 
46.00 
440/ 
47/5 
42.06 

42.45 
39-/4 
47.73 
40.00 

25.92 

47.58 
45.44 
51.21 
44 79 
46.52 
53.82 
4625 


Rainfall 

Inch Miles 
(>‘0,11. »,*» 


Moan 
Discharge 
Sec. Feel- 


Runoff' 


1 6321 
4740 

2 59 41 
36 23 
68 07* 

3 15 79 
7 8688 

44 36 
535 83 
3 21 66 
29949 
7 28 50* 
26260 ♦ 
J 36 25 
*34868r 
17572 
122 23 
28433 
t 7/ 92 
288 46 
/ 26 0! 

*484 80 * 
296 0/ 

2 0 2 22 
72 ’/0 
3 19 55 
2 2 395 
38/46 
2 7 9 86 
3/7 74 


176 23' 


46.00 * / 8078 , 

46./5 22 6/4 2 3/7/ 




Annua! 

Rainfall 

I nches 

46-/5 

7/77 
6 7.52 
58.65 
53.73 
5/- 54 
56.4/ 
5/. 06 
58.87 

52.48 

52.49 
53.00 
65.08 
58.00 
50.00 
48.56 
46/4 
46.00 
46.47 
50.2/ 
46.59 
43.83 
42.00 
48.58 
49.00 
53.00 
58.68 

46.00 
51.07 
39.75 
42.00 
40.24 


Rainfall 

InchMjles 

( )nQ,Tf.MiIe* 

15137 

6/09 
292 36 
42 23 
80 63 . 
3 50 47 
2 2 564 
57 70 
768 25 
35/09 

2 99 72 
7362/ . 

3 28 65 
730OO* 
3 79 OO* 
7 92 68 
133 8/ 

» 3/0 96 • 
/88 20 

3 70 05 
/ 23 00 
53/22 

4 7964 • 
2 0647 

78 40 . 
.330 72 , 
2 93 40 
37720 . 
2 6556 
2 73 08 
* / 6 506, 
/ 97/8 


Mean 
Discharge 
Sec Feet 


Runoff 


Annual 

Rainfall 

Inches 


Rainfall 

InchMiles 

(>*c*nn,u* 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec. Feet 


Runoff 






/ 63/8 /3 61-55 > 

4 2 66 


/ 76 23$5StMfi(l\/488.82 7 ( 3 09/8 


2 3/7/ [3.73 1.42 2 51 1638.99 8/ f 7/ 04 


2 0724 
20724 < 


50.67 

54.78 
59.12 
48.0/ 
46.93V 
50.36 
47.88 
42.42 
49.80 
49 42 
5070 
49-00 

58.53 
60.35 

56.53 
52 66 
53.23 
45.9/ 
47.// 
46.02 
48-48 
46.00 
42 00 
45.07 
43.03 
48.00 
4528 
44.64 
53.27 
S/.63 
4700 
4/-77 

/574 50 ; 


* t 6620 

4656 

2 5599 
3457 
70 40 

3 42 4S\l 
t 9/52 

4793 
*649 89 V 

3 30 62 
2 8664 

«•/ 2593 
2 9558 
/ 5088 

4 28 50 
2 0906 
75437 
3/035 
/ 90 80 
339/7 
/ 27 99 

*55752 
>4 79 64 
/ 9/55 
68 85 
.2 99 52 

2 2640 

3 66 05 

2 7700 

3 54 70 
a/ 84 7/ 

2 0/ 73 


C , $ C < 


3 03 S/ 


54% 


3 03 5/ 4.9J 1.862.21 


44 79 


Graphical representation for 
each year, of Gaae Heights and the 
Maximum and Minimum Pi scharges 
af Se/ma, Ala. 


FLOOD stags 


Vertical Scats of Discharge, 

60QOOsec feet. 


zero of case 




ft ECO* os or previous High Wats*, 
at MoNTOome*Y t Ala. - 


UL 


-:r 



Year 1886. 
** 1833, 


Gauge Height 


59 Feet. 
61 » 


WOO 


1901 


Annua1 

Rainfall 
Inches 
56. !7 

72.12 
72.72 
3760 
53.60 
50.36 
62.43 
5883 
49.80 
65.28 

59.74 
6/. 00 
68.07 

74-45 
69.45 
65.78 
7/.OS 
65.82 
77-39 
68.00 
76 - 2 / 
75.48 
68.00 
66.54 
62.47 
70.00 
73.07 
55.00 
65 76 
59.92 
5400 

56.74 


Roinfoll 

InchMiles 


£i 

184 24 

6130 
/4 88 
4/47 * 
83 40 » 
>34245> 

2 4972 
66 48 

> 64989> 

43672 

3 47/2 

15677* 

3 4 3 75 
186/3 
526 43 
2 5874 
2 06/3 

4 44 94 
2 89/3 

>50/ 16 . 

2 0J 79 
9 lj82 

*7 7656 . 
2 8280 
99 95 
43680* 

3 6533 
•4 5/ 00 > 

34/ 95 
4/7 65 
* 2 7 2 22 . 
27509 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec Feet 


Runoff 


3 6 715 


Annual 

Rainfall 

I nches 

6575 

73.18 
78.90 
68.78 
63.6/ 
62 28 

61.56 
59.77 
4980 

67- 3/ 
64.62 

60.56 
69.00 
73 82 
70.00 
62 99 
64.98 
57.67 
63.49 
56 04 
6/59 
60.09 
50.29 
47.22 

63.38 

6/00 

67.38 
55.9/ 
65.6/ 
52.24 
48.00 
44.80 


Rainfall 

InchMiles 
o.a, «*;*»« 

2/566 

62 20 
34/64 
4952 
9542 * 
4 23 50 
246 24 
6754 

• 64989 * 
4 5030 
3 6898 

7 3564 
*348 45* 
/ 8455 
530 60 

2 50 07 
/ 8854 

3 8985 

2 57/3 

4 /3 0/ 

/ 62 60 
72829 
5743/ 
200 69 
/ 0207 

*38 0 64* 

3 3690 

4 5846 
34//7 
3 53 89 

• /8 864* 
2/9 9/ 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec Feet 


Runoff 


03 05 




J <04 54 25 

(8 7! /9) 


3 67/S S.54Z.2SS.81 /9 7/.70 


4 03 05 198 2412SI 


59.70 




1902 


1903 


Annuo / 

Rainfall 

Inches 



Mean 

Discharge 
Sec.Feet 


Run-off 


16620 

40 76 
22 0 70 
39 33 
it 76 . 

2 6479 

/ 94 00 . 
49 67 
•64989' 

3 1/35 

2 5769 
/ 0560 

>2/7/5' 

1 0150 

3 82 18 
/ 83 96 
/ 4677 

*3 24 43. 
133 9/ 
3 69 09 

2 4364 
6 2 660 

*548/6 . 
19763 
8/79 
330 72 . 

3 5/50 
*42640* 

3 4928 
3 34 02 
/ 8597 
2 22 75 

80 76 24 

(t 74 02) 


Annual 

Rainfall 
I nches 
59.53 
60.62 
63.00 
59.34 
52.79 
50.36 


Roinfall 

InchMiles 
r >*u.n. Miles 


3 394/ 


as If 

5* V* 


3 3941 4l22.0i2.04 i 


3 3 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec Feet 


Run-off 


48.50V t 94 00V 

54 99 

64989 

3 48 95 

2 80/3 
/ 2603 

* 25250 
/ 34 85 

3 99 26 

2 03 34 
/ 4242 

>32448f> 
/ 9930 

3 5759 
/ 3343 
6 6308 
58242 
22172 

75 87 
3/2 00 
240 00 
3 9770 

2 93 96 

3 38 56 
/ 94 6/ 

2 3/33 


fell 


3 443/ 


Sl% 


83 56 24 

(6 9 css) 


3 443/ 4.27111 2/6 


tees MOtmi » peter* to . * ash 1 hot on. p 


ETOWAH. COOSA, & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 1909. 


U. S Engineer Office, 

Montgomery, Ala. June / S J 1909 

To accompany report of this dote 

7H3dU 

Capt. Corps fff]Engrs. U. S. A. 


1904 


Annual 

Rainfall 

Inches 

50.67 
39.20 
48 80 
5760 

42 95• 
38/3 

39 98 
33.13 
28-54 

43 49 
3850 
36.57 
41.17 
43 22 
3774 

40 78 
4/32 
4/OS 
4/4/ 
34.89 
34 32 
46 03 
2 9 48 
43 27 
32 2/ 
40.00 
4 3. II 
40.88 
4/ 24 
3700 
38. OO • 
36 85 


Rainfall 

Inch Miles 
c> •Cu.n.Milts 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec Feet 


Run-off 


/ 4544 


y> j 


, 63 62 52 

(S 30 tl) 


14544 i.imn.n 




1905 


Annua! 

Roinfoll 

Inches 


Rainfall 

Inch Mites 

O. O/.Et. Mites 


Mean 

Discharge 
Sec. Feet 


f?un-off 


2 5/ 30 






/708.22 


2 5/30 4.421.54231 


1906 


1907 


Annua! 

Rainfall 

Inches 


S/.67 

73.28 
69-59 
53.43 

52.48 

50.36 
64.96 
53.65 
49-80 
63.08 
72.04 
627/ 

64.28 
58.72 
64.57 
59.22 
7/02 
70.83 

66.37 
6 /. 66 
64.74 
64 52 
67 82 
52.12 

57.49 
53.00 
51.7 9 
53 2! 
£782 
50/3 
S/./7 
50.00 


79/3.54 


Mean 

-• Discharge 
> sec Feet 


Runoff 


Annual 

Rainfall 

Inches 


Mean 
' Discharge 
Sec. Feet 


Runoff 


,, 3 73 68 


5/.00\>3/824 * 
26735 
44534 
3/7 04 
34233 
2 20 75 
2 6524 


3 035/ 


If**! 


9749 09 3 73 68 4382.21^49 /6 47- 62 . 

(e ri 42) 


► > O 
U 6 M 


3 035/ 4371.8625 


6 5 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 




























































































































































































































































































































































































































House Ooc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess 






































































































































































































































































































































































































































1ft 

</> 

« 

C/> 

** 

in 


M 

C 

o 

O 

TJ 

fO 

<0 


oo 

lo 

(M 



a> 

in 

3 

O 


U 

ci 

* 


o 

2 

X 

ift 

*. 

* 

6 

u 

x , 

fc 

ki 

K 

Ui 

a . 

w 

5 

Or 

o 

2 

4 

X 















































































I HE r/ORRIS PETEES CO.. WASHINGTON, O. C 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., ist Sess. 

















































































































































































































DRAWING, NO. 3 


ETOWAH, COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909. 

















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































'"tNORRIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON. C■ C 



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































THE NORRIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON. O. C 

















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































D/MM/VG SO. /2. 


x v/ ' T A x * x , vy w vx x jrxixxjjrxx V/ u JiV HI V ili XV O . 


SURVEY OF 1909 


Danuarp 


s /? /Jsri.^?.?: 


3000 


2000 


r 


L"_i' 


/<?£>£> 


u. 


/February 


F ^s - ^(o -?js; 


- .-* ■s 




Marc/) 


3 t ~Af ,fW Ap ffs 


June 


Ju/p 


~3r 7B 7W~ ep 2 


Sf> S£T dp J\r~ 


S', 


» t 


\A 


L r 


4 - 


xir do 2\5 ~J5 


T 


fra ^?ir \jb 


September 


-~ /7 'S' ~ 2 o As- 


Oc/ober 


Dorember 


December 


<> so AS' ~ip> jfcr 5FI 3r 7E ✓k- 


Y 7p TP iS 70. A?2 


'i. . _ 


^ jpa She \rftnj r e~€t t> dfj 


7o/t r/_ C hose r _ St t 

JO. 4 37///on 




rwr Nommis patkas «-, waihinotoh. d. c 


COMBINED TALLAPOOSA 

and coosa Shortage 

Doffed fine p/ves dat/g f/owage, or shortage, /or fhe 
7affapoosa river a/ Cherofee Jf/aff Co/nf/ned sborr- 
ape or /off /foe was offa/ned jbg add/hp, befou 
doffed fine, fhe sforfape erf ff/verside 6e/otv 
4600 Dec. ft., fhe fofa/ te/irers/de sbortepe 
added 6e/np 40.4 /////on cm. ff Oorr?p>/fed, Tforr? OS- Oeo/op/caf 'Surrey /xfe/aor7is 



\ 


43.39 


20.35 


3.97 


7b 7/up oo so Sbortepe 
/n 6/77/b/? cuff. 


ana 


c °csq 45 Worfacft Carre. 


U S. Engineer Office, 

Monfpomerp /Va dune /0, 1910 

To accompany report of this date. 

Captain Corps offangineers, U. S. 6. 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 


































































































































































































































































































































































# 



PERI YAR DAM 
(India 1889 - 96 ^ 



CATARACT DAM 
(Australia 1902- 08) 



VILLAR DAM 
(Spain 1870-1878) 


FURENS DAM 
(France 1862- 1886) 


/o 


so 


so 


Radius* 1525 -> 



(France 1867-1870) 


Rochas * Infinity 



NEW CROTON DAM 
(New York 1892-1907) 


SCALE OF FEET 

80 

Radius-Infinity^ , 


25.75 



WACHUSETT DAM 
(Massachusetts 1896-I9°6) 


THE NORRIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON. O. C 


/oorsET 


House Doc. Ho. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sesc. 























































DRAWING NO. 13 


ETOWAH, COOSA & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 
SURVEY OF 1909. 





































DRAWING NO. 14 


ETOWAH, COOSA, & TALLAPOOSA RIVERS 









































X/ 

/ 

/ 

/■ 

^7 

f 






































, 

/ 

/ 

s 

f 






































/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 






































/ 

* 

/ 

/ ' 








































7 

/ 






































1 

/ 

/ 

/ 

f 








































/ 

/ 

f 

■ 







































/ 

y 

/ 

’ 




















f 














' 1/ 

< 



J 


/ 

/ 



































x 

71 

H/* 

// 


( 

7 

/ 

/ 

1 
























I 










c 

7 

1/ 

y 




X7 

/ 

/ 

7— 


























-N— 









7 




{ 

Y/ 

r 

V 




























X 











/ 

\ { 

7 






























1 











> 

/ 

/ 

T 











t 

f 

s. 

E 

v< 

-// 

JEi 

x? 

o 

C F 

/ 

E 














y 





/ 

/ 

1 












A 

• 

7C 

W 

20 

7/> 

77, 

T 

777 

60 

ry 

O r E 

rope 

7?' 

a/ 

% 

c 

At 

f 

: a 

ft 

. 

7 S 

<u> 

-ie 

ja 

/< 

te 

r/j 

'U 

> 






7 





/ 

t 


















a 

Of 

X 

no 

Co* 

DA 

* 

1 

% 

77! 

■UL 

'A 

°et 

J 

—■ 

X 

\ 



— 


/ 

i 





—T 

( 


































— 



f 




/ 

—h 

/ 



































) - 

i 

/ 





r—ft 

/ 

l 



ft 

Vc 

V 

* 


A 

'i/ 

? 

£ 



9i 

7 

'/? 

t 


Oc 

O 

r 

if 


lF) 

f 








— 




1 

f 


i 

r 

— 

/ 

/ 

L 



20 

Cot 

t 

0 

c 

W 

daL 

21 


5 

60 

’wet 


' , 

'Ja 

SO 

okz 

i—j 

2 


/QO 

//? J 

Eh 

'JL 

no 

zsLz 

L 

ft 

A 

/46 

rrs: 






no 


/SO 


no 


/60 


150 


140 




no 


no 


!00 


THE NORRIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON. O. C 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 

















































































































































tHAW/i' 

'G /VO. 

/S 





Ero 

WAH 

Riv. 

Re si 

- RVO 

'R 


STOW. 

AH, COi 

isA m 
SUP 

7 TALL > 
VEY 0 

'POOS A 
P / 90S 

| R/VE 

_ 

PS 








L 

5p/\ 

Vagr 

'/way 

9/77 0 
Of L 

f Dit 
lam 

chat 
as m 

ge t/i 
oc/if/6 

roug 
d by 

i pro 
f/ooa 

ooseo 
ect at 

T 

xa. 







j 

7/1 







> 

~OFfM 
Base - 2 

ULA : 
OO, S/c 

<9= * 

oe- /o-/o 

d 3 C 1 b 1 
oo, C fr< 

S, SoU 
m Ku/h 

e far c£ 
rs lahU 

s. 









CIV 
















i 

T nd of 5* 

Limit of 

Day, cf-6 

f?ise,d= 6 

b p< 

i5 



VJD 

s n 
















End of 4 

fh Day,d=6. 

is 

-L- 

^ I 

>< 

It 

Of 

s -5 
-S-—— 



VJS 

'k 












End of ; 

] d Day, d 

= S.62 — 

1 Endo 

fb*day,dd 

u 

Q> 

(0 

9/ _. 

§ 

-to - - 

VO ! 

*> L^ 

H 

limit of Rr. 
d~S-7S 

e, 

So 

$ 

*\ 











c 

5^ 



7 *^ End of 

k 

,5“ Endoi 

j day,U~y. 

4 th day,dS. 

K> 

*r> 

£ 

0 

Ji 

• 

s: i 

k ts 

u o 

« J 

%-k— 



50 

* 

s. 








End of 

2 nd Day, 

d=V4 — 

1 

End 

if 3“ day,/. 

t’tttr - 

^5 

> 

*o 

«Vl 

£ 


* 

l 

\ 

xrj 

•0 

5 X 

no ro 



~45 

* 








\<v/ 



$: 

& 

_ 

C 

ej^ 


2: 

o 

C\ 


*0 





4& 

$ 






•0 

'x 

End 

o f Z* day 

d-J.7Z - 

N 




Ov 

«Vl 







35 

t— 

V 










yf^ 


Si 

k 

g 

V) 

a. 










SO 

8- 


End of 

I st Day, 

{-24S - 

/ 




\y 

r - 



VS 

CNJ 

N 





h/bmitki 

Jca<L/o r . 

WZ - 



-25 

- 

w 





1 * 
II 

’d of 1*0 

ly, cl-2 /6 










/ 

ifiac 

A sa is h 

<tcUZy \'aa 
nf Eng in 

eer. 



— 








< 

k 

& 

vN 










» - 




±5 









V$> 








U. 

S Encin, 

-£R Off/ 

C£, 


E6 

1 - 







Da 

■tchzrrae 

.Ezotzss, 

\ncls of 

Cu F.t.i 

'Er Sec 

mcL 



To 

MONTG 

accompar 

- Q} 

y report 

-/El 

vfain Como 

of this c 

oflbdmeei 

’ate. 

-s. U.5.A. 


.05 

EG 

_ c 


1 _j 

• t 

_ t 

~~i 
. 1 

_ L 

Z _ 

7 v 

_ i 

f> 


.Q 

.2 

4_ 

SL 

i. 

_2 

z 

3J 

6 

. ..4 

<? 


THE NORRIS PETERS CO., WASHINGTON. D. C. 


House Doc* Ho* 253 » 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 






































































































































HE SOURIS PETERS CO.. WASHINGTON, P. C. 


House Doc. No. 253 ; 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 
























































































































cs, 


V" 

C:^y 




































































